New domain expiry process and droplists for .uk

[webber]

One thing:

I think it is important to remember that @webber is just the messenger here and this was proposed instead of the 'pay to play' proposal which most people were also against.

Doesn't mean I like or agree with it, but I just wanted to put that out there.

One other thing, why can't these, or any future changes, be implemented on a trial/review basis with a view to inviting feedback or having a final vote on them in say 3 months time?

Thanks DJ, I am however a little bit more than a messenger. I did vote to approve this proposal in the UKRAC. I considered it to be a good compromise and a significantly better outcome than what was panning out two or three years ago with Nominet-controlled auctions or economically controlled access (pay to play).
I'm not yet convinced this will all be a positive change or that dropcatching will be fairer, but the UKRAC has scheduled a review of this about three months after it goes live. That will be a great time to submit you feedback and thoughts after working with it for a couple of months.

 

[JamesTuplin]

Having restrictions will inevitably result in fake memberships/tags. Everyone is free to use as many tags as they want if they thing it will help. Nominet is convinced using multiple tags will not make a meaningful difference.

And you believe this!?

I'm not "happy", there are a few of things the UKRAC proposed and were not implemented.

Can you share with us what proposals the UKRAC made and which were and were not implemented?

Public consultations are not subject to a vote. I don't make the rules...

Previous major changes have warranted a vote. What makes this different? Remember we have already had past votes on this!

Multiple threads about this including: https://www.acorndomains.co.uk/threads/your-views-drop-catching-uk.172502/

I don't see anything of note here other than the initial call for comments a year ago!

There is less need to police things because the rules are more relaxed.
The same complaints and investigation procedures remain in place as before.

More 'relaxed' = Nominet closes their eyes and counts the $ ? The same complaints and investigation procedure that was critically flawed which was the root cause for the need for change?

Echoing a comment made by @Pedigree . The issue is not with you specifically @webber. But it just feels this has been rushed out with no prior warning.

 

[JamesTuplin]

 

[JamesTuplin]

Thanks DJ, I am however a little bit more than a messenger. I did vote to approve this proposal in the UKRAC. I considered it to be a good compromise and a significantly better outcome than what was panning out two or three years ago with Nominet-controlled auctions or economically controlled access (pay to play).
I'm not yet convinced this will all be a positive change or that dropcatching will be fairer, but the UKRAC has scheduled a review of this about three months after it goes live. That will be a great time to submit you feedback and thoughts after working with it for a couple of months.

Will be too late by then im afraid.

 

[webber]

Will be too late by then im afraid.

Surely we have to see it in practice and then draw any conclusions and amend it.

View attachment 3571

Hence my disappointment that I mentioned earlier...
It's unfortunate, but it's really difficult to engage Nominet members, be it consultation, AGM or elections.

But it just feels this has been rushed out with no prior warning.

This is three years in the making! Far from rushed. A lot of people have been asking why is this taking so long to implement. Even after the Board approved it some were asking why it's not yet ready.

The same complaints and investigation procedure that was critically flawed which was the root cause for the need for change?

That's something outside of the scope of UKRAC, and the commission sits at Board level

Cant see how this will work. Surely once someone gets the latency and timing spot on its game over for everyone else ?

Is this one where closest to the Nominet server wins ?

If your route is stable enough and you can compensate for the latency, then you should have the same chances as anyone else.
We'll have to wait and see, but I am mildly optimistic.

 

[Paullas]

Can anyone suggest (pm is fine) the best host to use so i can get the best latency sames as everyone else. Asking for a friend.

 

[webber]

Can anyone suggest (pm is fine) the best host to use so i can get the best latency sames as everyone else. Asking for a friend.

I use Digital Ocean, their datacentre is in Slough
Some use Mythic Beasts who have a DC at the London Linx exchange

 

[JamesTuplin]

Surely we have to see it in practice and then draw any conclusions and amend it.

Surely it would be have been 'fairer' to either drop all domains at once or within a certain time window (1 hour) e.g domain example123.co.uk drops between 2 and 3pm, this would have lessened the impact multiple tags (and multiple CREATEs) would have.

Hence my disappointment that I mentioned earlier...
It's unfortunate, but it's really difficult to engage Nominet members, be it consultation, AGM or elections.

That may well be. But where is the 'coming soon' notification? The last time there was a vote in these forums, albeit a small vote, people wanted to keep things 'as is'. Was this an option that was put forward?

Nominets argument seems to be stress on servers, but they have resources using surplus funds to fix this.

This is three years in the making! Far from rushed. A lot of people have been asking why is this taking so long to implement. Even after the Board approved it some were asking why it's not yet ready.

Too long in its current state. I find that hard to believe I am afraid. Instead of pay to win its collude to win.

 

[cav]

Did Nominet consider no dropping and replacing it with an auction run by Nominet?

 

[lazarus]

Cant see how this will work. Surely once someone gets the latency and timing spot on its game over for everyone else ?

Is this one where closest to the Nominet server wins ?

I think it would be more about fine-tuning instead of how far away you are. Theoretically, if I was in Australia I could send my request off 200 ms ahead of time and still beat someone who is 0.5 ms away if I timed it right.

 

[JamesTuplin]

Did Nominet consider no dropping and replacing it with an auction run by Nominet?

Was voted against.

 

[webber]

Did Nominet consider no dropping and replacing it with an auction run by Nominet?

Yes, that was one of the very first proposals, I think it was back in 2019 or 2020.
There was a strong sentiment against this among members since it was seen as a money-making scheme at a time when Nominet was splashing large sums on various company acquisitions.

Surely it would be have been 'fairer' to either drop all domains at once or within a certain time window (1 hour) e.g domain example123.co.uk drops between 2 and 3pm, this would have lessened the impact multiple tags (and multiple CREATEs) would have.

If you drop them all at once you are spreading your resources over X number of domains you are trying to catch that day. Therefore some would be tempted to acquire additional tag/s resources. I advocated for a smaller window in which domains would drop because a few members have suggested this and it would reduce load on servers if it was during the night for example. But Nominet was keen to retain the reg timestamp as the drop timestamp for more consistency. This was all discussed in the consultations.

The last time there was a vote in these forums, albeit a small vote, people wanted to keep things 'as is'.

There was no overwhelming majority for any solution.

Can you share with us what proposals the UKRAC made and which were and were not implemented?

Some initial feedback exclusively from UKRAC members is in this meeting minutes. It was later opened to wider membership feedback which you can see in the roundtable and the minutes that followed.

 

[cav]

Was voted against.

that’s a shame. A well run Nominet could’ve used the profits to fund lower reg fees/good causes…. and everyone has the same chance of acquiring the domain name (deep pockets depending)

 

[dee]

Cant see how this will stop extra tags now its been explained . It will still give extra chances at catches if theres still a quota (even if polling is gone)

 

[webber]

Cant see how this will stop extra tags now its been explained . It will still give extra chances at catches if theres still a quota (even if polling is gone)

As mentioned above, anyone is free to apply for additional tags if they believe it will help. It shouldn't make any meaningful difference, Nominet says. But this will be more transparent, no more neighbors, friends, employees or fake tags.
There will only be the existing AUP of 1,000 failed <create> commands per 24h. This was discussed in the meetings and it could be increased if server resources are not seriously impacted. The <domain:info> limit will also be reviewed in the same way since it is seen as a replacement for the DAC.

 

[dee]

As mentioned above, anyone is free to apply for additional tags if they believe it will help. It shouldn't make any meaningful difference, Nominet says. But this will be more transparent, no more neighbors, friends, employees or fake tags.
There will only be the existing AUP of 1,000 failed <create> commands per 24h. This was discussed in the meetings and it could be increased if server resources are not seriously impacted. The <domain:info> limit will also be reviewed in the same way since it is seen as a replacement for the DAC.

Thanks, and understood that it's supposed to be fair, and understand you're an advocate for this based on this fact. However, in the maybe four or five years i think it is since i've had a TAG, it seems the playing field has never been fair even though it's supposed to be. I'm not massively technical , neither I suspect are most TAG holders but for the few that are really good at this stuff is it just another opportunity for a grab ? Surely having 5000 create commands gives you the opportunity to flood the timestamp from 5 tags ? And if thats not the case, then surely it will be one tag thats worked out the exact trip time through the shortest route to the exact millisecond ? Maybe i'm not understanding the technical side enough. At least the random drop meant you could all have a random shot ( if exploits were negated of course.)

 

[Paullas]

We are not (or i am not) talking about tags, we are talking about membership from friends, family members etc. I have 4 tags which i use for different activities but only 1 membership which is 1 quota.

What everyone is saying (correct me if i am wrong here) is this will just favor more memberships thus Nominet will get more money for more memberships and the better domains will filter though to the same members after a few months have passed or though private platform behind closed doors auctions.

 

[dee]

We are not (or i am not) talking about tags, we are talking about membership from friends, family members etc. I have 4 tags which i use for different activities but only 1 membership which is 1 quota.

Its always been an advantage to have extra quota for catching. So... that meant a separate entity, with no connection having a tag to also use So cheating if you wanted the extra quota

Edit. Should also mention there were also exploits in the system that got used to even greater effect.

 

[webber]

In the current system there is a real benefit in getting additional memberships and tags, despite being clearly against the rules.
In the proposed system additional memberships will be meaningless since you can get additional tags on your account. But I must stress that Nominet believes additional tags will not make a difference, it's all about timing.

 

[JamesTuplin]

@webber Just so there can be no doubt. I am a member and I wish for my parents, grandparents, children, kids and the milkman to become members (each with their own quota). Would this be ok? If not, what extra steps will be taken to monitor registration patterns, better vet applications of those wishing to become a registrar and punish those found in breach of t&cs ?