Re: Has the EPP world really changed?

"\"Michele Neylon :: Blacknight\"" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.provreg
Message-ID <D1AC4482BED7C04DAC43491E9A9DBEC3E6FE98@bkexchmbx02.blacknight.local>
On 29 Aug 2012, at 09:16, Patrik Fältström <[email protected]>
 wrote:

> 
> On 29 aug 2012, at 10:09, "\"Michele Neylon :: Blacknight\"" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> We have one client that handles all registries we integrate with
>> 
>> I can't imagine any sane reason why we would want to maintain multiple ones.
> 
> We have one _provisioning_system_ that our customers use (the actual domain name holders). That provisioning system must be able to communicate directly via epp with all registries that the holders of the domain names want to manage. For all other registries, the customers get crappy service by us because lack of epp triggers a manual process regarding interaction between the registrar and the registry.
> 
> So it should be in a _mutual_ interest for both registries and registrars that epp implementations is as easy as possible to multiple registries and not only one.
> 
> Sure, I can see a business model where a registry by having a Very Different Epp Implementation believe they are "locking in" registries to them. That is sort of true, but it does not lock in the registrants which ultimately do decide what registries (and registrars) they do business with.

Patrik

If a registry wants to be "special" and they're not Verisign then why would registrars integrate with them?

In a newTLD world registrars are not going to be able to integrate with ALL registries and will have to be selective about which extensions they choose to carry and which ones they integrate with first.

If we are offered a list of registries we'll integrate with the "simpler" ones first, because it takes less time and costs less money and has lower risk ie. we're less likely to run into weird issues that cause headaches for us and our customers .. which in turn costs us money

Assuming that registrars will deal with a registry's weird implementation might work where there is a monopoly type situation and the registrar has a strong business reason to do so, but when there is no monopoly type scenario they're not going to ..

Regards

Michele

--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
http://www.blacknight.com/
http://www.dotwhat.co/
http://blog.blacknight.com/
http://mneylon.tel/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Locall: 1850 929 929
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

_______________________________________________
provreg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.