NameSmash Interview: Antony Van Couvering and the Dawn of the Expanded TLD System
Posted September 23rd, 2008
There is a lot of ground to cover in time for the approaching storm of new TLDs. Over the coming year we will be regularly consulting with experts in the domain community to paint the clearest picture of what’s to come. This round, we sat down with Antony Van Couvering, Principal of Names@Work.com (Van Couvering’s consulting company) to pick his brain on what the initial effects of this massive change may look like.
At the ICANN meeting in Paris, Van Couvering sat down with a variety of Registry providers and conducted a “Speed Dating” interview with each of them, spending no more than 5 minutes each (real speed dating rules applied) in an effort to gather information on what they can provide for the tidal wave of new TLDs that are about to crash on the internet shores (his findings have been published here http://www.namesatwork.com/blog/2008/08/31/speed-dating-the-new-gtld-registry-providers-summary)
Click the jump for Van Couvering’s thoughts on the results of his experiment and the new TLD rollout.
NameSmash: You’ve put together really valuable reference material for anyone in the business with questions about what exactly the registries are prepared to do with the onslaught of potential new TLDs
Van Couvering: I think it begins to show the outlines of what’s out there for aspiring TLDs. It’s pretty clear to me that there are a variety of strengths and business models, and I have to think that this is very good for a diversity of TLDs
NameSmash: How did the Speed dating format come to be?
Van Couvering: I didn’t come up with the idea — it came from Jothan Frakes. He had done some “speed-dating” among attendees at Domain Roundtable when he worked with NameIntelligence; that was a great success, so I guess he decided it would work in this context too — and it did (Jothan is now working at Oversee.net).
NameSmash: Of the criteria listed for each registry, which three do you find to be the most universally important for a registry to meet in this situation?
Van Couvering: I don’t know if I do. There are basic requirements for any new TLD, and just about all the registry operators meet them (note: “registry operators,” not “registries” — the TLD itself is the registry). They have to be able to insert names into the zone, resolve those names, provide WhoIs, handle transfers among registrars, etc. With very few exceptions, they all do this. More distinguishing is how they are going to help new TLDs in this application phase, and how they are positioning themselves — big, small, community-minded, commercial, etc.
To me, the start-up is what’s hard — after that, it’s a steady state that most of these registries are handling already. Those that are just doing ccTLDs at the moment will have to learn how to handle the ICANN regulatory environment, but I think that’s entirely achievable.
NameSmash: You mention in your series that you feel the AUS Registry is the best prepared of those you interviewed. Can you tell me a little more about that? Or what leverage they might have over the rest?
Van Couvering: If I gave that impression I didn’t mean to. Not that they’re not prepared, they certainly are. But I wouldn’t say they have an advantage over anyone else. For one thing, they’re not offering to invest in a TLD, and that may be a very important point for some TLDs. Again, I think it matters a lot what kind of TLD you want to start. For instance, for some community-based TLDs, whose goals are not commercial but are more about having an Internet identity for their community, COCCA, which is open-source and can be deployed either on your own machines or in a hosted environment, and which costs practically nothing, might be a much better choice than some larger registry operators who will exact their pound of flesh in exchange for “five nines” reliability and super-duper resolution abilities.
NameSmash: Do you feel ICANN is appropriately prepared for this?
Van Couvering: ICANN had better be prepared for this. ICANN was created for this. If you recall, its twin mission was to break the monopoly of Network Solutions and thereby bring down prices through market competition, AND to introduce new TLDs. It accomplished the former quite quickly, but its second effort has taken a long time to bear fruit. We have had some new TLDs, but under such artificial constraints (in other words, at the whim of the Board of Directors of ICANN), that it has been impossible to tell what a market would bring. Now I think we’re getting closer.
Others would argue that there are plenty of successes. It’s just that nothing has challenged .com. Unfortunately, in some people’s minds, that seems to be the criterion for success. I hope that we see a variety of different models, with different goals.
I see three major classifications of new TLDs so far. There are probably more, I just haven’t seen them yet. 1. Community/geographical TLDs. .SCO (Scotland), .CWM (Wales), .PARIS, .BERLIN, .NYC, .BZH (Britanny).
2. “Vanity” TLDs — big corporations who want their own TLD. Domainers have their knickers in a twist about this, but I think it will be a lot less prevalent than they fear.
3. Big commercial TLDs that focus on a large consumer product area. I’m making up these names now, because I don’t have specific knowledge, but things like .MP3, .MOVIE, .SPORT, etc. These different types are all going to want to work with different types of registries
NameSmash: Do you feel that the potentially prohibitive cost of implementation will foster an unfair exclusivity among who is able to participate? If so,do you feel that is a necessary factor?
Van Couvering: It will definitely be a barrier to entry, and I don’t think that’s an accident. Although ICANN says that the application fee will be decided on a cost-recovery basis, there’s no doubt in my mind that they don’t want to deal with thousands or tens of thousands of new TLDs. So the cost of entry is a way to discourage too many at first, without having to articulate rules about who gets to participate — rules that would surely occasion howls from those who were left out. To be honest, it may be the fairest way to achieve their goal. In principle, at least, a great idea should easily be able to find funding. For instance, there are certainly many registry operators who say that they’re willing to invest in their clients’ ideas.
NameSmash: What do you feel will be the course of events once the first applications are accepted?
Van Couvering: Oh, that’s easy. Nothing much at all will happen. Once applications are accepted, there will be lots of backing and forthing between ICANN and the applicants. There will be a publication period. There will be a chance for people to object. There will be a contract negotiation. There will be lots of marketing coming from the new TLDs with regard to their Sunrise and Landrush periods. Lots of sound and fury — signifying something, perhaps, but in the first six months, nothing tangible.One thing to look for are some very different start-up rules. We saw auctions for premium names in .MOBI, we saw collision auctions in .ASIA. Now ICANN is thinking about auctioning off one-letter reserved names in .COM. So I think you will see auctions as an important element in start-up periods, both Sunrise and Landrush.
Also, suppose for a moment that there are 500 new TLDs, or even 100. Do you suppose that GoDaddy is going to change its well-honed cash machine of a site in order to list all 100 of them? It’s possible, I suppose, but a registrar is not required to offer a TLD, and there are some that will generate very few sales, and I believe that some TLDs will ask ICANN if they can become their own registrar
We’ll start to see registrars concentrating on just a few “common” TLDs, and registries more and more selling directly to the public. The registry-registrar division doesn’t make a lot of sense for a company that wants their own TLD, and will not be selling names to the public, for instance. Possible it won’t make sense for other specialized communities either.
Van Couvering is not just a one man think tank on domain issues, he is also a human being with interests and a man who makes mixtapes for himself:
NameSmash: Antony, what is inspiring you right now?
Van Couvering: I’m reading a fascinating book called Natural Knowledge in pre classical Antiquity by Mott T. Greene that someone stole from a library and sold to a bookstore. It looks at different methods of “science” before the concept of science became codified as the western science that we know. I am also listening to a playlist I put together called “Fool Fool Fool” which has about 100 songs with “fool” in the title — mostly older country and R&B. The title is taken from Webb Pierce’s great song of the same name.
Van Couvering is also the author of a compelling blog found at http://www.namesatwork.com/blog/
Tags: Antony Van Couvering, ICANN, Names At Work
Posted in ICANN, Interviews, Know Your Domains by Kelly Hardy
