New domain expiry process and droplists for .uk

[super-whois]

As has been in the past, I would have expected a Nominet Webinar asking for feedback on this topic, followed by a formal vote, which would have been sent to every member.

Weren't you on said webinar?
https://members.nominet.uk/video-post/ukrac-drop-lists-implementation-working-group-roundtable/

Also, did you not stand for the UKRAC recently, the minutes of meetings provide transparency on the process. Maybe you haven't read them?

 

[diablo]

For me, the issue has always been less about what drop system is used and more about Nominet's inability or unwillingness to enforce its own rules.

 

[rob]

For me, the issue has always been less about what drop system is used and more about Nominet's inability or unwillingness to enforce its own rules.

Would agree with this, and it has been an historical issue that undermines confidence in what Nom do. If the argument against it is that it is perception only, then communication is a problem.

 

[JamesTuplin]

Weren't you on said webinar?
https://members.nominet.uk/video-post/ukrac-drop-lists-implementation-working-group-roundtable/

Also, did you not stand for the UKRAC recently, the minutes of meetings provide transparency on the process. Maybe you haven't read them?

The roundtable was from the end of 2021 and my opinion hasn’t changed since then. I would have expected a similar roundtable before a final decision was made. Given UKRAC minutes are behind a login and more often than not have a summary of what has been discussed rather than the detail, I don’t see how all members could have ever been properly informed.

 

[webber]

The new dropcatching system has been live for two weeks now.
What are your thoughts so far?

There will be a brief update on the droplist implementation in Friday’s UKRAC meeting so I thought I would seek feedback from other members to bring to the table then.
Please share your thoughts here or in the Is dropcatching broken? on the Nominet forum

* I'm reopening this old thread so that people who engaged here will hopefully be notified

 

[ukbackorder]

I don't think their systems can handle the load. I also think certain people might be flooding it deliberately at certain times to create horrendous latency. They just need to be able to respond immediately to every request as it's made. Until then people will send in their hundred creates 100ms before the drop thus creating more latency so others have to send them in earlier.....The reality is you should only need one or two if the system responded in a timely manner. As an experiment try registering a domain you know nobody will want. It will be refused until drop time so you can get an idea of the range. That time will bear no resemblance to the time when people are flooding the EPP. I'm obviously discounting other potential exploits that might exist and assuming people are just chasing as they're instructed in nominet's rubbish documentation.

 

[JamesTuplin]

Wether we use the old or new drop mechanism, whilst those that game the system go unpunished it’s immaterial what we think. Nominet need to act to show they are serious about restoring the memberships trust.

I want to see:

An exhaustive list of actions that can be taken against members when proven guilty of colluding or otherwise breaching the terms of membership.

A clear definition of what constitutes collusion.

Is it:

• 1 member with multiple sub members (family members, friends, milkman) catching domains to benefit a single person financially.
• Public drop catchers using your DAC allowance to query domains for others without your permission?
• Forced to sell domain(s). Sign up for platform 123, but you cannot keep the domains you must sell them benefiting the owner of the platform.

What proof Nominet would accept as proof of collusion.

 

[JamesTuplin]

Nominet should have and should still limit every individual, regardless of how many memberships or tags they have or are associated with, to only one tag that can access and register dropping names.

They could have and still could taken the opportunity to make everyone who wanted to or wants to access the system reapply for a new specific tag and as part of the application request: photo ID, proof of address etc.. and make them sign a specific agreement warning them that they could lose all domains or be finned for a breach of this agreement.

Just my thoughts.

I agree with you pedigree. If Nominet were to revoke those domains that were found to be unlawfully registered or at the very least suspend members for a significant period of time … there’s absolutely no deterrent at the moment. Moneys money to Nominet. Doesn’t matter to them who catches what.

 

[JamesTuplin]

And as far as proof of ID. Don’t know about you, but half of these world class dropcatchers. Don’t know anyone that’s either met or spoken to them in over 20 years in the industry.

 

[ukbackorder]

Maybe this should be in a separate thread as Ciprian was for asking for feedback about the new system before his UKRAC meeting tomorrow.

 

[LCHappy]

I think people should try to define what is "fairness" in this issues.

Is it someone turning up with no skills, no input, no research and catching the same? If that is the case then it's the same fairness that will lead to multi taggers catching more, as they will just get more tags.

What is it people are trying to achieve?

 

[ukbackorder]

You realise you shouldn't be using anywhere near even a single quota of creates? Unless you're chasing hundreds of domains of course.

 

[domain-names]

The new drop process is much more transparent and saves a lot of time and resources knowing the time of each release.

If the idea of changing the process was to make it fairer, e.g. a wider selection of people having more success each day, then it has failed miserably as it's the same people as before dominating.

If this is down to skill then fair enough, well done, if it's down to people abusing an unpoliced system then something needs to change.

Our main concern is that it ends up like the voting system and .UK release, giving TAGs with more domains registered or more money in the bank a higher quota. This was absolutely disgusting and should never happen again.

 

[ukbackorder]

I'm aware, but I was asked to define fair.

Just wondered as people don't seem to grasp this. They think you need thousands of creates apparently. They contribute to the latency lol A quick look at the svTRIDs after firing off a hundred creates in less than a ms will show exactly why this is a waste of time

 

[super-whois]

If only I could lend my spare creates to those struggling with the new system!

 

[aquanuke]

A 1 minute rolling limit of 10 creates per name would be an easy way to bring fairness while maintaining the current system

 

[ian]

Interesting how many a board member has caught since their meeting at Nominet. Conflict of interest?

Only one catch for me, but a decent one at least.

 

[webber]

Interesting how many Webber has caught since his meeting at Nominet. Conflict of interest?

I totally understand your concern, and yes, there is a conflict of interest which, as always, I've declared at the beginning of the discussion about dropcatching. So did Andrew, as you would expect.
If you'll look at the agenda of the meeting, you will see that this was supposed to be only a brief verbal update on the implementation of the droplists. There were no details or stats and no specific cases were discussed.
The MD of registry reassured the council that the systems are working as intended and that there will be a formal communication in the next few weeks. The councillors in turn relayed some of the concerns raised by members.
I'm sure my other colleagues who are on this forum (@rob, @xdnet) can confirm this.
The meeting minutes that capture this discussion will be published soon.
My catch rate hasn't changed after that meeting:
29/09 caught 1
30/09 caught 2
01/10 caught 2

 

[ian]

My catch rate hasn't changed after that meeting:
29/09 caught 1
30/09 caught 2
01/10 caught 2

When was the meeting again and how many domains were caught by your tags on the new system prior to said meeting? Not suggesting the formal meeting discussed anything that could help, just interesting, and I find any NED role that is in direct competition with its members a concern but I have no doubt you clarified this before taking on the responsibility. It was more a sweaping statement

 

[webber]

Meeting was on 30 Sept at 15:00 and lasted 3-4 hours.
I'm not a board member/NED, just a poor old councillor in the UKRAC