Nominet say can have as many TAGs as like.

[aqls]

Perhaps Jay you could advise me roughly what percentage of the .co.uk names are held by speculators and what percentage by "real" end users ?. From my research I would guess about 75% by speculators and 25% by real end users ?.

Any ideas ?

Inshallah

None* of my domains are speculative.

They may be parked but they are all planned for development at some stage.

Buy domain now whilst they are till available even if in short supply, develop later.

And what is to say that parking i.e. offering a type-in browser the opportunity to find people offering what they are looking for, closely matched to the exact term they typed in, is in any way speculative?

*even the typos are there to gain traffic for the developed or advertising sites.

-aqls-

 

[aqls]

but are waiting until the DAC reports the domain as available,

If they wait then the good names will go to the top name catchers whose script is certainly faster than your efforts.

There is no choice for the normal dropcatcher but to fire off speculative emails.

In my view speculative emails are a fairer system and I don't know why they are so restricted.

Buy hey!

-aqls-

 

[jonno]

For instance, they could fire off a batch of 100 and hope that one of them gets there quicker than anyone else's do...

hmm what good would this do?

surely they will all arrive at nominet in the same order?

 

[Jay Daley]

In my view speculative emails are a fairer system and I don't know why they are so restricted.

The reason (which is at http://www.nominet.org.uk/tag/auto/aup/) is basically that it takes significant extra resources to support.

 

[Edwin]

hmm what good would this do?

surely they will all arrive at nominet in the same order?

Nope. Unless they're literally fired from a server inside Nominet's own hosting facility, you can anticipate that they may get routed differently during intermediate steps between the originating email software and the destination.

 

[aqls]

The reason (which is at http://www.nominet.org.uk/tag/auto/aup/) is basically that it takes significant extra resources to support.

OK - though for technical reasons rather than for fairness.

And why such a low limit vis-a-vis the DAC?

Tags can still be threatened with extinction for misuse if they choose to abuse it.

-aqls-

 

[aqls]

Nope. Unless they're literally fired from a server inside Nominet's own hosting facility, you can anticipate that they may get routed differently during intermediate steps between the originating email software and the destination.

Can I have some of what you are taking?

-aqls-

 

[Jay Daley]

OK - though for technical reasons rather than for fairness.

And why such a low limit vis-a-vis the DAC?

Tags can still be threatened with extinction for misuse if they choose to abuse it.

Just a bit more on the Automaton side:
- PGP is very computationally expensive and signatures need to be checked on every message. (see www.nominet.org.uk/tech/pgp for what we are trying to do about this).
- we store every single message sent to the Automaton for ever.
- a high percentage of Automaton messages are specs (we will publish stats on this later this year).

On the DAC: I don't agree that 216k lookups per day is low, in fact I think it is quite high. However we are looking at increasing it when we are confident that it will still perform just as well.

 

[aqls]

Just a bit more on the Automaton side:
- PGP is very computationally expensive and signatures need to be checked on every message. (see www.nominet.org.uk/tech/pgp for what we are trying to do about this).

On the DAC: I don't agree that 216k lookups per day is low, in fact I think it is quite high. However we are looking at increasing it when we are confident that it will still perform just as well.

Sorry, I didn't mean to say that 216k lookups was low, I meant that it was high relative to what I can do with speculative emails.

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction on that issue.

-aqls-

 

[Edwin]

Can I have some of what you are taking?
-aqls-

Not sure what you mean. AFAIK the internet uses store-and-forward to deliver emails, whereby intermediate servers between the origin and destination mailservers receive the email then pass it on.

If there's momentary congestion during one such pass-on phase, it's quite likely that a different route (using different servers) would be chosen, one which might work out quicker.

The routing is worked out for each email sent, so ultimately emails may take very different routes to reach the same goal.

Easy enough to check, btw. Send yourself 100 emails in very quick succession to a remote host, then see if all 100 arrive in the order they were sent out.

 

[aqls]

Unless they're literally fired from a server inside Nominet's own hosting facility,

Sorry Edwin, I misread your earlier post - I thought you were suggesting that we use Nominets own servers - oops!

The routing is worked out for each email sent, so ultimately emails may take very different routes to reach the same goal.

There is merit in this suggestion.

Especially if we bung up the main DAC route with rubbish untraceable spam from zombie computers.

Take away the advantage all these intelligence oriented programmers have.

Then we're all in the same boat and dealing with the same speculative limits = fair.

I feel as though I shouldn't joke about these things in public in case some moron decides its a good idea!

-aqls-

 

[philipp]

That is part of it, all to be included in an article to be published in a national paper shortly,

Inshallah,

When can we expect this amusingly inaccurate piece to be published, and what paper should we be keeping an eye on?

Yours in anticipation,

P.