Re: [DNS] Registrant Agreements

Re: [DNS] Registrant Agreements

From: Jason Pay <jasonpay§au1.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:01:39 +1000
All sounds good, BUT if Grace Bros was forced by industry policy to had
over customer information to Nike, there would be protections in place to
prevent Nike from using this information for anything other than record
keeping. auDA have constructed a policy that revolves arround registrars.
Resellers are expected to liease with the registrar about matters of
concern then if the registrar thinks this is an issue for the industry the
registrar goes to auDA and complains, then if auDA think its in the best
interests of the registrars they will do somthing. The reseller has only
one choice when it comes to their upstream registrar doing somthing dodgy,
and thats change registrar.

If auDA was to implament a policy protecting resellers, registrars would
get upset in that the policy would be restricting they right to market
their services, regardless of who they are marketing too, and as i said ,
auDA represents registrars.

auDA monitor this list, many resellers have expressed concern and auDA have
basicaly made 0 comment.
their inaction represents the value auDA puts on resellers in this
industry.


JP..

Ron Stark [ronstark&#167;snapsite.com.au] wrote:
> In respect of the domain name, the only contract is between the
> registrar and the registrant.  Resellers don't exist.  That's the auDA
> model.
>

thats not entirely correct, there are contracts between the registrar and
resellers
and between registrants and resellers.  what isnt allowed is an indirect
contract with a registrant.

For example Enetica's reseller contract binds the reseller to auda policies
thus including them
in the whole process. auda specifically require that anyone doing more then
10 domains a month
is officially a reseller.

Given that auda will not change anything in a rush, resellers should make
the most
of the situation, rather then trying to hide the registrar, where the
registrar has
a good reputation and a strong brand they should leverage off it.

Just like you dont buy joe blogs rebranded shoes at the local shoe store
you buy nikes, addidas etc.
even though nike has company owned stores. unlike shoes a domain is not a
physical product but
a licence.  imo the whole branding concept still applies. the actual
licence is identical between
registrars but the service and support and additional services are not and
that is where the
key diferentiators are for registrars and thus resellers.

the same scenario happens everywhere I walk down my local plaza and half
the small store brands
are sold accross the path in grace bros. where I end up buying something
depends on more factors
then just price. if I am after advice I will go to the small store, if I
know what I want and
know there is a sale I will probably buy from GB.

selling the knowledge that if there is an issue you may be sitting on a
phone queue for 30 mintues
with registrar XYZ or have to make international calls with registrar DEF
but get rapid
help with registrar ABC is just an obvious selling point that resellers can
use to say this
is why we use registrar ABC. as an example.

if the concern for not letting customers see a registrars retail site is
price then selecting
registrars with high retail price is an obvious tactic provided they give
you a good margin.
Enetica specifically has a high retail price for this reason, to ensure
reseller have a
decent margin, higher in almost all cases then Enetica itself.

imo the registrars that have a good reputation and service will dominate
the ones which dont.

Vic




---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
author, further information at the above URL.  (368 subscribers.)
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Apr 27 2015 - 00:00:13 UTC