Competing registries

Dave Crocker (dcrocker@brandenburg.com)
Sun, 22 Feb 1998 12:00:13 -0800


At 04:55 PM 2/22/98 +0000, Jim Dixon wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Feb 1998, Javier SOLA wrote:
>> COMPETITION BETWEEN TLDS CANNOT EFFECTIVELY EXIST.
>
>Why? The Naming Committee's policies were silly. Nominet's policies

We need to be much clearer about the choices and their effects than this
discussion, and similar ones, have attempted.

A recent email cited the term "lock-in" with respect to suppliers. This
idea is fundamental.

LOCK-IN
-------

Domain names have two different control points for end-users. One is the
time of initial registration. The other is the time of renewal. It is
possible to have wide choice at the time of registration, but no choice at
the time of renewal, other than to switch names. One of the serious
differences in opinion in this debate is the cost/damage of having to
change names. Another is the likelihood. Oh, and I suppose another is
whether domain names are subject to the general concerns about corporate
naming.

Changing names is normally a very expensive, and often damaging, corporate
activity. Nissan has still not recovered the market position damage it
suffered when it chose to change their product name from Datsun. (This
includes market share loss in Japan, where the name Nissan was already known!)

At a minimum, name changing carries extensive marketing communication
(marcom) costs, switching the contents of a company's many and varied
marketing literature.

In the case of domain names, the effect is much, much worse.

For marcom use of email and web, the cost is probably equivalent to
changing an area code, although area code changes are assisted by the
infrastructure mechanisms -- when I dial 415 for a now-650, the phone
company tells me I've messed up -- and domain name changes are not.

However the cross-linking of web references means that domain names are not
only part of the infrastructure in the way a telephone number is, but are
also the basis for the concept of the web itself. Too many dangling
references (Click; 404 Not Found) with cross links and the web dies. So it
isn't just the difficulty of getting an end-user to type in a new domain
name when trying to reference your web page; it is getting all of those
pointers updated on all of the pages which contain a reference to your page.

So, whatever the competition available during name registration, the user
is effectively locked in for renewal.

Hence this is not an event subject to significant competitive forces. The
buyer doesn't have reasonable choice in switching.

Hence there needs to be special attention and assistance given to ensure
proper consumer protection after the time of registration.

CONSUMER PROTECTION
-------------------

Protection entails two basic concerns: Price and service.

Make the registry non-profit and the special control the registry has over
the user will not be exercised in the form of price gouging. Add some
public oversight to the non-profit and the operation is likely to have
relatively stable policies, rather than engaging in complex gaming to get
customers and then take advantage of them.

Alas this possibly will not ensure good service, and that is the reason
that I've come to believe in multiple registry administrative authorities.

However, competition at the time of registration does not require a
for-profit basis for the competing registry admninistative authories. This
point is usually missed. Having more than one registry administrative
authority is likely to instill some healthy competition among the
registration organizations, even when they do not have the profit incentive.

The argument that registry administrative authorities will have an
incentive to provide value-added services, if they are allowed the profit
motive, misses where to put the value-added services.

The basic job of registering is straightforward and well-understood. There
is no infrastructure benefit in having that activity carry additional
activities.

VALUE-ADDED SERVICES
--------------------]

There is nothing wrong -- and probably quite a bit right -- with having the
front-end sales and service function be for-profit competitive and to look
for value-added services to offer.

To the extent that some value-added services are made feasible or are
improved by having a back-end portion, there is nothing that requires or
even suggests putting it into the registry operation. If a back-end
value-added service is needed, the for-profit, front-end sales and service
folks (registrars) will no doubt realize this and develop it.

So let's be clear about the concerns that need to be addressed. Domain
names are an essential part of the Internet infrastructure. There is
strong community consensus that the top-level of IP address assignment
should be done by multiple, non-profit entities, with subordinate
assignment done by other agencies, many/most of which are for-profit.

Let's use the same logic for domain names.

d/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Crocker +1 408 246 8253, (f) +1 408 249 6205
Brandenburg Consulting dcrocker@brandenburg.com
675 Spruce Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA www.brandenburg.com