Re: Standard Extensions
Luis Muñoz <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.provreg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Aug 23, 2012, at 7:59 AM, Patrik Fältström wrote: > I.e. if registry A and registry B implement epp even the slightest differently, that imposes a direct cost on the registrars that work with A and B. A cost that is to be balanced against the potential extra income we can get by using epp instead of being a reseller. Consider as well that this is also a cost for new registries. A new registry wishing to enter the market also needs to think hard about the differences that have already been implemented and try to conform to them in order to reduce the effort required by the registrars down the road (ie, if you aim for quick acceptance by the registrars). The cynical point of view would be that established registries have this as an incentive to not change their unique ways. After all, they already have a market that is working for them. An existing registry wishing to provide back end operations for a new gTLD knows that there is a base of registrars that are able to connect "out of the box". Why make it easier for other registries to compete for that new gTLD? Best regards. -lem _______________________________________________ provreg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg