Plus, what if ICANN (or some court) decides that what NSI and Tucows are doing/contemplating is against the rules? Even if it isn't, what happens to the names from those registrars who choose not to implement a similar service? What about names that are below the minimum bid amounts set by NSI and Tucows? Answer: names will still drop. And again, it costs nothing to pound the registry.
Agreed .... I am with you on this ..... The problem is not solved as of today
Neither of your proposed solutions fixes the problem, unless 1) most big registrars opt-in for the NSI/Tucows auction-before-deletion method and 2)we get ICANN, and 3) registrants, and 4) probably Verisign, and lets throw in 5) pool.com and 6) snapnames, to agree to that. I doubt that
My proposed solutions do not fix the creds problem in certain probablisitic cases. I agree. Infact my proposed solutions were half and incomplete. I did not intend to propsoe them as full fledged solutions.
1) Shove more commands per second down the smaller number of connections, therefore the load would not be reduced, or
b/w could be clogged also. However what I said there is immaterial - since jordyn pointed out something I overlooked - which is there is genuine usage of the batch pool whch would be required, so unless verisign gives us 3 pools my solution has an issue there too - Bhavin