.uk Shelved

[scottb]

If Nominet really cared about adding value to the UK namespace, they would reintroduce .UK as a simple alternative to the existing mainstream .co.uk.

Then sites could gradually migrate to branding as the new direct extension, and we would be in line with other countries.

It is obvious that security features were a red herring to try and justify a competing domain and a huge money-grab.
Did they honestly think that there wouldn't be massive opposition with plans to screw millions of their existing customers, or huge confusion from the public if they pushed it through? Private emails going to the wrong companies for years afterwards etc..

Just give people what should have been in place from the start.

 

[Stephen]

100%

If Nominet really cared about adding value to the UK namespace, they would reintroduce .UK as a simple alternative to the existing mainstream .co.uk.

Then sites could gradually migrate to branding as the new direct extension, and we would be in line with other countries.

It is obvious that security features were a red herring to try and justify a competing domain and a huge money-grab.
Did they honestly think that there wouldn't be massive opposition with plans to screw millions of their existing customers, or huge confusion from the public if they pushed it through? Private emails going to the wrong companies for years afterwards etc..

Just give people what should have been in place from the start.

Agree, it should be at the pace of the .co.uk owner to change over as every case is different.

Dont put a time limit on it as many don't understand the implications of not taking up a .uk if it was an option for the .co.uk owner and it would create a 90% of .co.uk owns .uk but not all, better to have 100% by linking ownership of both.

 

[aZooZa]

I don't support giving anyone .uk (2nd level) domain names because keeping registrations at the third level allows for potential name space expansion in the future. We don't know why we might benefit from additional third level domain extensions in the future so I don't consider it sensible to prevent them being made available as and when deemed necessary. I realise that we'll potentially be able to register 2nd levels of .whatever in the future but there is currently plenty of "UK brand loyalty" so I consider that British Internet users are likely to have a preference for domain names ending in .uk.

If 2nd level registations under .uk were rolled out we all know that the other third levels would eventually die. The whole thing becomes a migration rather than a name space expansion, except that once it's all done there's no potential for growth. Millions aren't put off registering in .co.uk now because of the extra three characters (i.e. .co) therefore millions of new registrants won't register in .uk if it were made available.

I'm happy with keeping it all at the third level because I think it's sensible.

Quite so. And as you alluded to in posts passim they still have the option of rolling out e.g. .safe.uk etc. as an option for their ludicrous safety DNSSEC alternative, or more sensible ideas like .{city/county}.uk for geos, etc. etc.

 

[scottb]

I don't support giving anyone .uk (2nd level) domain names because keeping registrations at the third level allows for potential name space expansion in the future....

But surely anyone could still offer third level domains afterwards?
It's true they won't be very desirable, but the existing ones are niche use anyway, or seen as second rate.

I am all for direct.uk, but not at the expense of alienating millions of existing nominet customers.
To me, it just makes sense to 'upgrade' the .co.uk which is firmly entrenched as the mainstream uk domain with 10 million registrations.

If asked, I am sure a majority of these site owners would prefer to use direct.uk instead, or at least have it as a shortcut.
It's the standard situation for almost every other country, and is simply less of a mouthful.

 

[namealot]

Oh bugger was looking forward to the landrush

 

[jmcc]

Moving from a managed registry to an open registry is easy. Moving the other way where registrants have to prove some element of entitlement before a domain is registered is far more difficult. But Nominet seemed to want to introduce an aristocracy in the democracy of .uk domains. It was like they never learned from the Eurid/.eu fiasco where simpleton rules were gamed with ease. The idea of direct.uk seemed more focused on the financial opportunity and not the reality of the market. People think ".co.uk". They don't think ".uk". Since .uk was established (25 years ago), almost a whole generation has grown up with ".co.uk".

Regards...jmcc

 

[Bailey]

I'm just imagining this mornings interpretation of "further investigation required" at Nominets offices this morning.

"Right gather round, Todays just another day, however we are going to thin the 20 or so staff involved in direct.uk down to just one - that will be you John, You won't be needing much space so just take the vacant cupboard down by the toilet.

Sorry Nom, I couldn't resist

 

[namealot]

Noms news says same as bbc with a bit more detail http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/latest/update-directuk I like the "address issues raised in the recent consultation" yes I imagine there were a few

 

[Bailey]

Noms blog says same as bbc with a bit more detail http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/latest/update-directuk I like the "address issues raised in the recent consultation" yes I imagine there were a few

I must admit I for one am guilty for being "overly flippant" about yesterdays announcement. But blimey the way some of the posts have been made here today, you'd think some can't be happy unless they see 'Dark Clouds' on the horizon

 

[websaway]

I expect by now everyone like myself have received an email from Nominet subject matter "Update on direct UK "

 

[GreyWing]

I must admit I for one am guilty for being "overly flippant" about yesterdays announcement. But blimey the way some of the posts have been made here today, you'd think some can't be happy unless they see 'Dark Clouds' on the horizon

Maybe some of us are just harder to be fooled than others.

 

[Bailey]

Maybe some of us are just harder to be fooled than others.

I have no problem accepting that. But from where I'm sitting things look a damn sight rosier than they did say 48 hours ago.

If arguments need to be made in the future then hopefully I'll be around to throw in my pennies worth.

I'm just surprised so much doom and gloom still pervades.

 

[namealot]

I must admit I for one am guilty for being "overly flippant" about yesterdays announcement. But blimey the way some of the posts have been made here today, you'd think some can't be happy unless they see 'Dark Clouds' on the horizon

Only good thing about the proposed .uk was for many it was a wake up call that domaining is still the wild west and that you should develop names and have a exit strategy? Some learned that in the ,com bubble bust it seams though many didn’t. wagons role

 

[websaway]

Maybe some of us are just harder to be fooled than others.

Maybe different people fear different things. The main bone of contention is not the introduction of .uk it's the cost to the consumer in time and money, that taken away which it certainly has been, they can investigate whatever they like at Nominet. And where the financial incentive has been lessened there is not such a motivation to try to introduce what was a direct competitor to the co.uk extension. So again lets remain vigilant but not phobic.

 

[GreyWing]

I have no problem accepting that. But from where I'm sitting things look a damn sight rosier than they did say 48 hours ago.

If arguments need to be made in the future then hopefully I'll be around to throw in my pennies worth.

I'm just surprised so much doom and gloom still pervades.

I'm not having a go mate, it's not your fault that you think the best of people. It is how it should be.....

But some of us don't take things at face value anymore....

 

[Bailey]

Only good thing about the proposed .uk was for many it was a wake up call that domaining is still the wild west and that you should develop names and have a exit strategy? Some learned that in the ,com bubble bust it seams though many didn’t. wagons role

I think you'll find the .com bubble burst was in relation to too many thinking 'development' was all that was needed to succeed

 

[websaway]

I think before Nominet set out on their investigation a movement should be started.

" No Direct Competitor To co.uk In the UK Domain Space "

or the like, Keep it simple so everyone can grasp it, no personal interests involved just the fact that the uk business domain space has already been sold through 9,000,000 registrations of co.uk.

 

[namealot]

I think you'll find the .com bubble burst was in relation to too many thinking 'development' was all that was needed to succeed

Many market experts believed that it was the corporate corruption on a major scale the promise of vast fortunes to be made….

Mix in the the increase in internet trading It served and gave an easy access to trading for a lot of traders who lacked any of the required experience. Basically trial and error methods of trading lead to losses in the stock trading market.

Sprinkle with research firms and there conflict of interest. Those pesky investment bankers had the research firms put not so honest ratings on the stocks, thus leading to an overall loss of wealth in the market. So now as then have an exit strategy develop and sell just make sure you do it before the burst not after ? Seams its still the wild west

 

[Bailey]

The picture I remember was of one that investment in just about any web site brought about instant growth. Projections being way over the business value. Reality dawned that a domain Site wasn't alone worth more than it was earning.

I don't think it had much to do with inexperienced players entering the money/stock markets. they would have only been small-fry anyway. and to my memory a lot had restrictions in place at the time.

I'm not trying to pull you apart - just keeping the historical picture accurate..

 

[namealot]

The picture I remember was of one that investment in just about any web site brought about instant growth. Projections being way over the business value. Reality dawned that a domain Site wasn't alone worth more than it was earning.

I don't think it had much to do with inexperienced players entering the money/stock markets. they would have only been small-fry anyway. and to my memory a lot had restrictions in place at the time.

I'm not trying to pull you apart - just keeping the historical picture accurate..

It didn’t bring an instant growth for many just the illusion spurred on by dubious research firms and investment bankers. Many companies. Corporation and individuals just piled in the money with the dreams of being like Microsoft etc overnight there was plethora of online traders both new and from the expansion of existing firms, little if any scrutiny over viability investors wanted big ideas more than a solid business plan just invest invest

The IPO’s of internet companies lead the field with a ferocity, sweeping the market into euphoria. Investors were just grabbing any and every new issue there was no looking at business plans to find out, for example, how long the company would take before making a profit, if ever. Overnight those who had for many years just dealt in what they know were now advising buy buy in typical daytrader fashion . Btw there were very few rules at all it was only after 2000 that individuals had to have a minimum of $25000 To ensure that they not insolvent.

your historical interpretation may be different to many others? Ditto mine