On 15/09/2023 16:04, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
John
While I agree that the focus on the 3 Rs might be misplaced I’m not sure that it’s such a negative.
It is the way that the market evolved, Michele, In some respects, it is an extension of the original registry-registrant model
Wholesale registrars have resellers in pretty much every country and region. It’s not going to be economically to become accredited and carry gTLDs directly if you’re in a very small market. Conversely it’s not worth the investment for larger registrars to get directly accredited for many of the smaller or more complex ccTLDs.
That's the problem with smaller markets. There's a kind of lack of shelf space (the registrar not having the local ccTLD as an option) for registrars selling to those markets so the registrants are more likely to stick with the local ccTLD and after a while, even with the complex rules, the local ccTLD will begin to overtake gTLD registrations as the market flips to being ccTLD dominated. After that, the only cost-effective way into such a market for a non-local registrar is to buy a leading hosters in that market. This has led to Godaddy having a major presence in the .UK ccTLD among others. This is the .COM website/country spectrum for one of the large registrations as a service registrars: | AD | 6 | | AE | 34 | | AL | 2 | | AO | 1 | | AR | 117 | | AT | 223 | | AU | 2,692 | | AZ | 4 | | BA | 3 | | BB | 4 | | BD | 26 | | BE | 49 | | BG | 1,364 | | BH | 1 | | BM | 1 | | BO | 2 | | BR | 286 | | BS | 36 | | BY | 3 | | BZ | 4 | | CA | 165,045 | | CH | 110 | | CL | 26 | | CM | 2 | | CN | 1,384 | | CO | 92 | | CR | 14 | | CW | 19 | | CY | 19 | | CZ | 58 | | DE | 6,224 | | DK | 523 | | DM | 34 | | DO | 1 | | DZ | 1 | | EC | 10 | | EE | 8 | | EG | 5 | | ES | 885 | | EU | 248 | | FI | 180 | | FJ | 2 | | FR | 1,299 | | GB | 2,632 | | GD | 2 | | GE | 5 | | GH | 3 | | GI | 1 | | GR | 24 | | GT | 7 | | HK | 1,810 | | HN | 12 | | HR | 7 | | HU | 62 | | ID | 124 | | IE | 1,786 | | IL | 113 | | IM | 1 | | IN | 532 | | IQ | 32 | | IR | 51 | | IS | 19 | | IT | 764 | | JM | 2 | | JO | 3 | | JP | 9,338 | | KE | 5 | | KH | 1 | | KR | 59 | | KW | 39 | | KZ | 13 | | LA | 1 | | LB | 4 | | LK | 5 | | LT | 47 | | LU | 22 | | LV | 11 | | MA | 9 | | MD | 12 | | ME | 1 | | MK | 2 | | MO | 7 | | MT | 46 | | MU | 2 | | MX | 42 | | MY | 687 | | NG | 2 | | NI | 1 | | NL | 1,124 | | NO | 39 | | NP | 3 | | NZ | 43 | | OM | 3 | | PA | 64 | | PE | 11 | | PH | 23 | | PK | 13 | | PL | 69 | | PR | 5 | | PS | 6 | | PT | 75 | | PY | 21 | | QA | 5 | | RE | 1 | | RO | 117 | | RS | 13 | | RU | 122 | | RW | 1 | | SA | 45 | | SC | 161 | | SE | 301 | | SG | 1,159 | | SI | 23 | | SK | 8 | | SM | 1 | | SR | 1 | | SS | 1 | | SV | 9 | | SY | 2 | | TH | 450 | | TN | 2 | | TR | 259 | | TW | 1,575 | | UA | 116 | | US | 566,920 | | UY | 7 | | UZ | 1 | | VE | 9 | | VG | 59 | | VN | 369 | | VU | 4 | | YE | 1 | | ZA | 153 | | ZW | 2 | Not all of them are necessarily in-country hosters but it demonstrates the effectiveness of the registrations as a service model. The problem for ICANN is that many of these hosters will never become ICANN accredited registrars. (That bulk transfer fee on more than 50K regs might be acting as a kind of additional tax on a large hoster intending to become a gTLD registrar if I am reading it correctly. If this is the case, and ICANN doesn't make an allowance for hosters becoming accredited and moving their existing registrations, ICANN could be deterring hosters from becoming accredited.) This is the country spectrum of the same registrar for a well known European ccTLD: | AR | 1 | | AT | 4 | | AU | 2 | | BE | 13 | | BG | 9 | | BR | 1 | | CA | 8,957 | | CH | 1 | | CL | 1 | | CN | 3 | | CW | 1 | | DE | 157 | | DK | 1 | | ES | 9 | | EU | 9 | | FI | 8 | | FR | 21 | | GB | 2,105 | | GR | 1 | | HK | 2 | | HU | 3 | | IE | 198 | | IL | 1 | | IN | 3 | | IS | 5 | | IT | 7 | | JP | 37 | | LU | 1 | | NG | 1 | | NL | 32 | | NO | 1 | | NZ | 1 | | PL | 7 | | RO | 2 | | RS | 2 | | RU | 1 | | SG | 17 | | SI | 1 | | TW | 3 | | UA | 4 | | US | 6,865 | | VG | 4 | | ZA | 1 | Godaddy's approach is more like a direct to customer sales model and it has 206 countries for its .COM spectrum. Some of those will be historical registrants and very small businesses with a single domain name. Due to takeovers, it has a considerable number of that ccTLD's registrations.
ICANN, however, has always been fixated with the physical presence of registrars (and registries) in a particular market as if it was some kind of magical indicator.
ICANN simply doesn't understand the hosting market. This is not surprising because ICANN isn't in the hosting market and is largely concerned with domain names. However, domain names have become commoditised to such an extent that they are a small component of the hosting market. ICANN's only source of data (publically, at least) seems to be the registrar reports and some of them frequently have errors that go unnoticed by ICANN. The danger with the recent price increases in .COM/NET is that some of the gTLDs are pricing themselves out of the market in developing countries and are making the ccTLD the more attractive option for registrants. Regards...jmcc -- ********************************************************** John McCormac * e-mail: jmcc@hosterstats.com MC2 * web: http://www.hosterstats.com/ 22 Viewmount * Domain Registrations Statistics Waterford * Domnomics - the business of domain names Ireland * https://amzn.to/2OPtEIO IE * Skype: hosterstats.com ********************************************************** -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com