Golding challenges McCarthy for Nominet board seat

Nominet has revealed the names of just two candidates who are standing in its non-executive director election this year.

Rob Golding of Astutium is on the ballot again, this time challenging incumbent Kieren McCarthy, who is standing for re-election for a second three-year term.

Golding stood last year and came a very close third place when there were two seats available. McCarthy won his seat in 2022 with a more comfortable margin, but only after a second round of voting.

Voting this year opens September 26 and the winner would take his seat in October at Nominet’s AGM.

Comment Tagged: election, nominet

Three applicants qualify for cheapo gTLDs

Three organizations have been given ICANN’s approval to apply for new gTLDs next year at a deeply discounted rate.

All three are non-profit or nongovernmental organizations, ICANN said. Two come from the Asia-Pacific region and one comes from Europe.

The identities of the applicants have not and will not be disclosed — to publish their names would likely tip the applicants’ hands in terms of what strings they intend to apply for, inviting competition.

The Applicant Support Program offers non-profit entities worldwide or small businesses in non-developed nations a discount of 75% to 85% on the base $227,000 application fee, along with a selection of other benefits.

As of today, there are 45 active applications, ICANN said. Seven come from Africa, 14 from Asia-Pac, five from Europe, two from Latin America, and 12 from North America. Another five haven’t said where they’re based yet.

According to July 23 stats, only five applications — three of which presumably have now been approved — had been fully submitted and were in review.

In the 2012 round, there were only three ASP applications and only one, from the company that now runs .kids, was successful in obtaining the discount.

The window for ASP applications closes in November.

Comment Tagged: applicant support program, asp, ICANN, new gTLDs

Blockchain crisis looming for new gTLD next round

New gTLD applicants could face more of a threat from blockchain-based alternative naming systems next year than perhaps they first thought.

ICANN is coming under pressure to give additional rights to the owners of top-level strings that act like TLDs on blockchains, potentially adding friction — and six figures of extra costs — to applications for matching strings.

In the recently closed public comment period on the current draft Applicant Guidebook, two blockchain naming firms focused on the risk posed from name collisions should a gTLD get delegated that matches a blockchain TLD.

More importantly, ICANN’s influential Security and Stability Advisory Committee expressed the same views.

Alexander Urbelis, general counsel and CISO of Ethereum Name Service, said in his comments that many operators of alt-TLDs will apply for their DNS matches in next year’s application round, adding:

ICANN should consider that a new gTLD, for which an identical string already exists in an alternative name space, should be considered a compromised asset, and that delegating such gTLDs may subject ICANN, and applicants, to substantial liability. In addition to the technical issues posed by name collision, such delegations could also result in consumer confusion, difficulties with resolving queries (particularly as access to alternative names is increasingly integrated into mainstream web browsers), security risks, and broken authentication systems

Shifting gears, Urbelis then goes on to espouse the exactly opposite view to what you might expect from an operator of a blockchain naming system:

We urge ICANN to ensure that operators of strings in alternative names spaces are not given preferential treatment in the upcoming new gTLD application round, either deliberately or inadvertently. Such operators should not be rewarded for choosing to operate outside of ICANN governance and policies, particularly when the results of such preferential treatment could be so devastating for the stability of the DNS, as well as consumer trust in the new gTLD program and the DNS itself.

However, he concludes that alt-TLDs should be considered during the application process, specifically when ICANN’s evaluators conduct the String Similarity Evaluation.

we note that the string similarity evaluation does not appear to account for strings that may exist in alternative name spaces that are not under ICANN governance. Given the proliferation of such strings and alternative name spaces in recent years, ICANN should not ignore their existence by considering string similarity within only the ICANN-governed DNS, particularly due to the technical issues outlined above in connection with name collision.

Currently, this evaluation stage only looks at similarity to existing TLDs, some strings blocked by policy, and other applied-for strings.

If Urbelis’ advice were taken on board, an application for .clown, for example, could find itself ruled similar to alt-TLD .down, which is on the Handshake naming system and available at some registrars.

ENS runs .eth as a blockchain TLD. While the company claims over 1.6 million names registered there, .eth can never make it to the consensus DNS because ETH is the protected three-letter code for Ethiopia and therefore blocked by a Guidebook policy that is pretty much locked-in.

Unstoppable Domains, which markets dozens of alt-TLDs, focused on name collisions in its brief comment to ICANN, seeking extra clarity in how the collision assessors will decide whether a string is “high risk”.

The current AGB says evaluators will look at both quantitative data — measurements of traffic for non-existent TLDs to the root servers for example — and unspecified “qualitative” factors. Unstoppable’s head of operations Michael Campagnolo wrote:

If ICANN wants to help applicants to assess their risk pre-application submission, examples and sources of qualitative evidence should be described and made available to applicants prior to, and in a reasonable amount of time before the opening of the application window, similar to the quantitative information.

The subtext here, it appears, is that Unstoppable wants to know if non-DNS qualitative factors, such as the existence of an alt-TLD matching an applied-for string, will be taken into account.

That’s a good question, and as the AGB currently stands it appears to be up to the Technical Review Team that will conduct the name collision evaluation on each application.

The Name Collision Analysis Project working group, which came up with most of the current name collision rules, seemed to have mostly ignored alt-TLDs in its work due to difficulty and timing.

Unstoppable points out that applicants with strings deemed at high risk of collisions could incur extra fees of $100,000 to $150,000, on top of the $227,000 standard application fee, so the extra clarity on the rules could avoid applicants having to reach deeper into their pockets.

While ICANN is adept at ignoring or merely paying lip service to self-serving public comments filed by commercial entities, it is bound by its bylaws to take the advice of its Advisory Committees seriously.

Comments filed by the 17-member SSAC will carry more weight, and SSAC is warning that collisions between DNS and non-DNS naming systems could raise security risks, promote instability, and create user confusion.

SSAC’s SAC130 (pdf) — formal Advisory Committee advice — makes four recommendations related to name collisions. One is:

The AGB should explicitly state that the TRT is allowed to include evaluating potential collisions with known, widely used alternative naming systems and other external sources, as these can create foreseeable security and stability risks for DNS users.

If ICANN adopts the SSAC recommendations, it seems the TRT will be encumbered with the heavy burden of figuring out how, when and why an alt-TLD and an applied-for gTLD create risks so unacceptable that the applied-for string should be blocked.

Another question that has been raised in recent weeks is whether alt-TLD operators should be able to use mechanisms such as Community Priority Evaluation and Community Objection to secure their TLDs or disrupt other applications.

Could Unstoppable, for example, claim that its cohort of .wallet alt-TLD registrants constitute a protected “community” and thus get a priority approval?

The company could certainly try, but experts in the policy-making community and ICANN staff seem to think the point-based CPE mechanism is designed in such a way to make such a claim incredibly difficult to back up.

ICANN will consider all of the public comments over the coming weeks and months before making changes, if any, to the AGB.

There are hundreds of thousands of alt-TLDs out there — over 6,000 are even carried by a handful of ICANN-accredited registrars — but it’s not clear how many are actually used.

With that in mind, should ICANN offer additional protections to blockchain-based alt-TLDs, many new gTLD applicants would face the very real risk of additional friction and huge extra costs.

15 Comments Tagged: .eth, alt-roots, blockchain, community, cpe, ens, ICANN, name collisions, new gTLDs, ssac, unstoppable

Two more dot-brands leave Verisign for GoDaddy

Verisign’s ongoing shedding of its registry back-end services clients continued recently, with two dot-brands moving to GoDaddy Registry.

The two gTLDs are .norton, the anti-virus brand which now belongs to Gen Digital, and .capitalone, the dot-brand for the financial services firm Capital One. Both recently updated their IANA records to show GoDaddy is now the technical contact.

The loss of .norton is perhaps notable because of Verisign’s shared history with the brand. Verisign allowed Symantec, then-owner of the Norton brand, to use the Verisign brand to sell SSL certificates for a few years following a $1.3 billion deal in 2010.

But Verisign has spent the last few years deliberately unloading its registry services clients onto its competitors. Other beneficiaries of this wind-down have included Identity Digital and Nominet.

1 Comment Tagged: .capitalone, dot-brands, gen digital, godaddy, norton, verisign

ICANN looking at new bulk reg rules

ICANN seems set to start creating more rules governing DNS abuse, including limits on bulk registrations and more tracking of registrants.

A small team of GNSO volunteers have put together a list (pdf) of dozens of proposed policy change areas, covering everything from registrant data accuracy to pricing to API access to getting ICANN Compliance to be more proactive.

While most of the ideas in the team’s analysis received a broad range of views, it settles on three areas, all related to bulk registration of abusive domains, that it thinks are ripest for further policy work.

The first is “Associated Domain Checks”. The small team think it’s worth looking into whether registrars should have to investigate proactively domains registered by known abusive registrants.

The group also thinks it’s worth looking into better industry information-sharing about domain generation algorithms, which bad actors use to create vast numbers of gibberish names that can be used in spam runs, phishing attacks, or botnets.

Finally, the group thinks rules around API access to registrar platforms should be looked at, given that bulk-registered abusive domains often seem to use APIs to programmatically obtain thousands of throwaway domains in seconds.

The small team thinks a Policy Development Process looking at just these three issues could be completed relatively quickly and the community could address the remaining issues later.

Whether the recommendations go to a PDP is now up to the GNSO Council, which will vote on the matter this Thursday. Assuming the vote passes, which seems likely, ICANN staff would then have to prepare a formal Issue Report, setting out the scope of future work, if any.

A PDP would likely take years to complete.

The three priority topic areas reflect closely the Governmental Advisory Committee advice coming out of June’s ICANN 83 public meeting. Both small team and GAC heavily source ICANN’s INFERMAL research and a recent NetBeacon white paper as their inspirations.

5 Comments Tagged: bulk registrations, dns abuse, gnso, ICANN

Reseller loss hits Tucows’ DUM but not revenue

Tucows reported revenue growth in its domains business in the second quarter, despite its domains under management going down due to a major reseller.

The company said last night that domains revenue was up 8% annually to $67.6 million at the end of June, with adjusted EBITDA for the segment going up 12% to $12.5 million.

But Tucows had 24.02 million domains under management at the end of the quarter, down from 24.3 million three months earlier. David Woroch, CEO of the domains business said in prepared remarks:

As anticipated, total domains under management and transaction volumes declined modestly—down 2% and 3%, respectively—reflecting the continued impact of one reseller that has moved a portion of its portfolio in-house.

Despite this, revenue for the wholesale/reseller domains channel rose 8% on last year to $57.3 million. Retail domains revenue was up 10% year over year to $10.3 million.

Including all of the company’s non-domains businesses, Tucows Q2 revenue was up 10.1% to $98.5 million and adjusted EBITDA was up 37% to $12.6 million, both compared to the year-ago quarter.

Comment Tagged: earnings, financials, tucows

GoDaddy counts cost of losing .co deal

GoDaddy has revealed how hard losing its .co registry back-end deal will hit revenue, but insisted that it has no plans to exit the registry business.

The company said in its second-quarter earning release that it anticipates “an approximate 50 basis point headwind to bookings and revenue” when the deal expires in the fourth quarter.

So that’s 0.5%, or about $6 million given GoDaddy’s quarterly revenue came in at $1.2 billion in the second quarter. CFO Mark McCaffrey said the loss will be “immaterial in and of itself” and will not prevent the company hitting its financial targets.

The loss of the .co deal (possibly coupled with the separate recent loss of the .in deal) inspired one analyst to ask executives whether the company has plans to exit the registry business, but McCaffrey said there was “no change in our philosophy”:

This was a one-off situation where we went out to rebid and the profitability metrics that were needed to continue in this relationship just weren’t there for us. So I would say it’s more on the strategy of our profitable growth and making sure we stay disciplined to our framework versus a change in philosophy

Dejargonizing this, it appears GoDaddy is saying “the other guys could do it cheaper”. In the case of .co, the other guys were Team Internet, which will receive 8% of .co’s gross revenue, versus the 19% GoDaddy was getting. (Update: Team Internet says in the comments that GoDaddy bid this time at 9%.)

For the second quarter, GoDaddy reported overall revenue up 8% at $1.2 billion and net income of $199.9 million, up 37% compared to the same quarter last year.

The “Core Platform” reporting segment, which includes domain name sales, saw revenue up 5% year over year to $753.7 million. Vanilla domain sales and aftermarket sales were both up 7%.

5 Comments Tagged: .co, earnings, financials, godaddy

Wine producers worried about new gTLDs

American vintners are worried that someone might steal their protected regional names in the next new gTLD round.

The Napa Valley Vintners has written to ICANN to “express strong opposition to the creation of any generic top-level domain
(gTLDs) that uses our distinctive name.”

The trade association asks that the names of wine-producing areas of the States be added to the Reserved Names List in the new gTLD program’s Applicant Guidebook.

That list currently is limited to the names of intergovernmental organizations, NGOs, and Red Cross/Crescent related entities.

The NVV points out that the names of wine-producing regions are protected by US law — you can’t say your wine comes from Napa unless it was in fact made there.

According to Wikipedia, there are 276 protected American Viticultural Areas in 34 states. More than half are in California.

Some of these names actually have a small degree of protection already, but only accidentally. The string “Napa” would be considered a protected geographic string until the current AGB rules, for example, but only if somebody wanted to run .napa as a city-gTLD.

The issue of protecting wine-related geographic indicators has come up at ICANN before. While it was processing the applications for .wine and .vin in 2014, there was a protracted bust-up in the Governmental Advisory Committee about whether they should go ahead.

Several European governments pressed ICANN to ban or delay .wine, now an Identity Digital gTLD, until promises were made about protecting names like “Champagne” and “Rioja” at the second level.

France in particular got very pissed off, but ultimately objections were dropped after the registry made some kind of deal with the wine-makers.

The NVV letter is cc’d to the federal government’s Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, presumably to send the message that the group is not messing about.

The letter (pdf) is addressed to “The Honorable Sally Costerton”, under the apparent assumption that she’s still ICANN’s acting CEO. That hasn’t been true for the last eight months. Also, as lovely as she is, I’m not sure she qualifies for that particular honorific.

1 Comment Tagged: geographic indicators, ICANN, new gTLDs, wine

Goodyear tires of its dot-brand

For the record, I’m not proud of that headline. It doesn’t even work in British English. But if I hadn’t done it, some of you would have complained, and I want you to be happy.

Rubber company Goodyear has become the latest new gTLD registry operator to tell ICANN to terminate a dot-brand.

In this case, it’s not the company’s primary, .goodyear, but rather .dunlop, the brand of one of its tire-making subsidiaries.

The company did not give ICANN a reason for the self-termination; the Dunlop brand appears to be alive and well.

Neither .goodyear nor .dunlop have any registered domains. Dunlop and Goodyear both use .eu and .com domains for their primary web sites.

Comment Tagged: .dunlop, dot-brands, goodyear, ICANN, termination

Team Internet loses Radix to Tucows

Tucows has scored a big win for its back-end registry services business, winning Radix and its portfolio of gTLDs over from rival Team Internet.

The companies said in a press release today that Radix will migrate its 11 TLDs, together comprising about 10 million domains, over to the Tucows platform.

This will bring Tucows’ total to about 17 million domains, following the migration of four million names in India’s .in, taking the deal from GoDaddy, which was the biggest single-TLD migration ever.

Radix’s portfolio comprises the 2012-round new gTLDs .store, .online, .tech, .site, .fun, .host, .press, .space, .uno and .website, as well as the Palau ccTLD .pw.

It’s a blow for Team Internet, which only recently boasted of winning the back-end business for Colombia’s .co, also from GoDaddy.

Tucows expects the Radix migration to go ahead in November.

4 Comments Tagged: back-end, godaddy, migration, radix, tucows