I don't believe that we should "advocate" a particular method other than one that will achieve the desired end. What if anything will get adopted will depend on the acceptability to registrars and registries and what can be implemented without radical or major changes to the systems of both of them. Examples include: 1. Wholesale elimination of the AGP. The AGP is part of the many registry contracts and wholesale elimination without the agreement of all registries who have one I believe would require a formal consensus policy. Registrars say that they make valid uses of the AGP (although it was not originally created for these uses) and could not easily eliminate it without significant pain or expense. Registries seem to be supporting this position. Which means that they are neither are likely to agree with this or vote for a recommended policy which includes it. 2. Application of a fee to all AGP uses (that is, a fee less than the full domain cost which would be equivalent to a wholesale AGP elimination). This method would require each applicable registry to take the action and would require ICANN Board approval. 3. Application of a fee if AGP uses exceed some threshold per month (this is effectively what PIR did). The fee could be as much as the full cost of the domain (still often referred to as $6.00 per year although the cost increased for .com, .net and .org this year). It is not 100% clear what threshold should be used to catch domain tasters but not cause pain to legitimate registrars, or what the fee should be to effectively eliminate tasting and not just change the dynamics of it. This method also would be done on a registry-by-registry basis and requires ICANN Board approval. 4. ICANN currently charges registrars $0.20 per domain added excluding AGP deletes. The exclusion could be removed in the next budget (or perhaps even sooner), but the registry constituency would have to agree (and perhaps would ask for other concessions). 5. The RAA could be altered change the clause stating that registrars cannot activate a domain unless they have a reasonable expectancy of being paid to a clause which requires them to have a reasonable expectancy of being paid AND keeping the money. Alan At 02/12/2007 08:49 AM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Hi Alan What other more viable options are there that we should advocate? JAM