> Does anyone actually *like* the idea of getting access to 'dropped names', > assuming the whole channel had the access. Ross asked the question, I'd like > to see it answered.
First let me say: I wouldn't resell access to dropped names. I sell domain registration because my web hosting customers need it. I don't want to offer more complicated things, such as dropped name access. As far as the ethics question (and why I don't want to see this service even if *I* have access): If we are getting access to names that are dropped at the registry (kind of like SnapNames), then that's fine with me. Nothing questionable going on. Just a simple "we attempt to be the one first-served and secure your name when it's available for everyone to grab it." If we are getting at dropped names that have expired at OpenSRS but are transferred to a new registrant instead of being dropped. (Or even names that are dropped in such a way to give your registrar a competitive advantage at re-registering the name.) That is highly questionable. The problem is that if OpenSRS gives names to new registrants (and gets a nice fee) instead of performing a registry drop, then there is a conflict of interest between trying to help the existing registrant renew (possibly up until the last second) and getting the new registrant the name. This could become a huge mess if someone accidentally looses a name (even if it's partly their own fault) and then they see that it was given to someone else in a non-arms-length transaction. They are going to be upset. This effects me because these are my customers with which you have a conflict of interest! Also, another problem is that not dropping names as the registry create multiple markets for getting dropped names. As an OpenSRS RSP I'd have better access to names dropping at OpenSRS than at NSI. NSI people would have best access to NSI dropped names. This is a mess. The first-come-first-serve model of domain registration gives each registrar an equal chance. If each registrar has their own dropped names market, then people in the dropped names business, are best served to have an account with EACH registrar doing this. That's a mess. All and all it's a mess. This mess is partly caused by the way the system works to reassign dropped names. It puts a lot of pressure on registrars to do this kind of stuff. I do understand why it feels very hard for OpenSRS to drop a domain in a way that gives OpenSRS no competitive advantage at registering it again, and then immediately attempt to register it again for a secondary market client. You've got to feel like you not doing the best possible job serving the secondary market client and that this is just a big game that everyone is playing. However, I think there are clear conflict-of-interest reasons that you shouldn't do this. Please don't disrespect the primary market just to get access to the secondary. Again: this mess is caused by the registry procedures for dropped names. My recommendation to OpenSRS (under these existing dropped name rules): only give other companies in the secondary market access to your connection resources. Let them develop the logic to catch names and pool the resources of other registrars like SnapNames does. Then *possibly* consider reselling those services; but still be very careful because there still seems like a conflict of interest in my mind if you are marking money per successfully registered name on the secondary market. And check with the channel first. You might be surprised to find that most people don't want access to secondary market names. I have no idea. David
