Re: bit.ly urls

On Sun, July 24, 2011 15:56, JC Dill wrote:
> On 23/07/11 8:36 AM, Kent Crispin wrote:
[...]
>> The incentives that apply to google are not particularly compelling for
>> registrars, because they are actually doing different things, and the business
>> environment is very different.
>
> But the *concept* - that you provide information even if you don't
> directly benefit from it, is the same.  If you want to be the "go to"
> place for information, you have to provide information that you don't
> always directly benefit from providing.

I understand the concept perfectly.  However, it doesn't apply in all possible
business situations.

>> Google crawls the web to constantly refresh it's internal database; the data
>> displayed is always out of date, and aging.  On the other hand, when you are
>> checking if a domain name is available, the primary criteria is whether the
>> name
>> is available now.
>
> This is a technical issue, not a business decision issue.

There are technical and business aspects to it.  Many technical issues have
decisive business implications.

> The technical
> details (of how you provide the information) are obviously different
> when you do a web search or a whois lookup.  The business decision to
> offer this information because it leads to a greater good (to becoming
> known as the "go to" source of the information) for your company's
> reputation similar.

If the cost, because of technical factors, is very much higher in one case over
the other, then the business decision is impacted.

Technical issues can be decisive factors in a business decision. In this case
they are very important.  But there are other, more business oriented issues
that are very important as well.  For example, Google, for all practical
purposes, has no contracts with the web sites it searches.  Registrars, OTOH,
have complex contracts with some of the registries, and complex legal
constraints registrars other registrars.

>> Also, the underlying search environment is very different.  A web spider
>> traverses public links in data that people are frequently *hoping* will be
>> prominently displayed in the search engines.  OTOH, checking for name
>> availability is done using different protocols, some of them under costly
>> contractual constraints.  Registrars and registries are actively hostile to
>> data
>> miners, and almost all of them rate limit queries.
>
> You could similarly rate-limit queries to your search tool, right?  It
> seems like it would be relatively simple to age each query made from a
> given IP address, doubling the time you age the query before you pass it
> on to the registrar.

[algorithm elided]

I realize it was a quick thought.  However, it doesn't work, doesn't address the
actual problem, ignores the issue of abuse, and doesn't consider the legal
implications.  (If I had the energy, I would try to explain these things, but
there is no real business case for me :-)
In fact, if ICANN's plans work out, there will be perhaps hundreds of new gTLDs
in the next few years, and that would change the business situation
significantly. ccTLDs will remain an issue, though...

Best Regards
Kent



-- 
Eat sushi frequently. - Avi
[email protected] is the human contact address.
[email protected] is the list posting address.
See below URL for subscribe/unsubscribe and list options:
http://inet-access.net/mailman/listinfo/list