Developers Fret Over Domain Name Drought
"The growth rate of people registering dot-coms has just skyrocketed," Dotster Vice President for Marketing George DeCarlo said. "There's definitely a shortage of usable domain names in dot-com," added Antony Van Couvering, a principal in Names@Work, an Internet consulting firm in New York City.
It's getting harder and harder to find a marketable dot-com domain name and that's starting to worry Web developers, according to Dotster.
The Vancouver, Wash.-based provider of domain name registration and hosting services contends that developers are concerned about running out of marketable dot-com names completely.
To date, over 70 million dot-com names have been purchased, and most, if not all, one word domain names have been taken on a global plane, the company said in a statement.
"The shortage of marketable domain names has led consumers to select alternatives that are difficult for their potential visitors to remember, or do not adequately describe the brands," it noted. "These domain names result in a lack of robust traffic to the site, confirming customers' insecurities about the value of creating Web sites."
The anxiety over the availability of dot-com names stems from the extraordinary interest in the domain over the last four years, Dotster Vice President for Marketing George DeCarlo maintained.
From 2002 to 2004, dot-com registrations increased at a steady clip of 4 to 5 million new names a year. That doubled in in 2005 to 8 million, and DeCarlo predicts it will double again in 2006, or balloon by 16 million over 2005.
"The growth rate of people registering dot-coms has just skyrocketed," he told the E-Commerce Times.
"There's definitely a shortage of usable domain names in dot-com," Antony Van Couvering, a principal in Names@Work, an Internet consulting in New York City, told the E-Commerce Times.
"If you want to go to a different extension, there are plenty of names," he added. "But because people normally put dot-com at the end of whatever they hear, that's what most people want to have."
Finding What They Want
If people are concerned about getting a good dot-com name, it hasn't deterred them from adding more monikers to the domain.
"We're seeing healthy growth in the dot-com and dot-net names," Jill McNabb, senior manager in the naming services group for VeriSign (Nasdaq: VRSN) in Washington, D.C., told the E-Commerce Times. VeriSign manages the dot-com and dot-net for the overseer of Internet domains, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).
"To me," McNabb continued, "that's evidence that domain name registrants are finding names that they want, and they're registering those names.
"In addition, they're renewing their names at a healthy rate as well, which, to me, is another indication that they're pleased with the names they're finding," she added.
She noted that the current renewal rate is 76 percent. "That's the highest that it's ever been," she said.
Better Service
She commented that sellers of domain services, like Dotster, have helped relieve the crunch on dot-com names by introducing innovative products, like name-suggestion engines, and alternative domain options, such as dot-biz or dot-info.
DeCarlo, of Dotster, added that his company has improved its domain search capabilities by allowing users to simultaneously check multiple proposed domain names.
Dotster's suggestion engine, he continued, draws from the pool of expired domain names as well as proposing names from other domains.
Low-Number License Plates
For searchers who want to use generic words in their domain name, DeCarlo recommends looking into country domains. "VC is an example of a TLD [Top Level Domain] that has plenty of generic words available in it," he observed. VC is the domain for Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
Country domains are also a good way to get the Internet equivalent of a low-number license plate -- three and four-letter domain names.
All the three-letter dot-com domains are gone, DeCarlo said, and of the some 456,000 four-letter combinations, only 97,000 remain.
What the shortage in usable dot-com names has done is create an aftermarket in domain names, maintained consultant Van Couvering. "A lot of names have been registered now once or twice and are simply passed from one party to another on the basis of a sale," he said.
"From a real estate standpoint, domains are only going to continue to increase in value, especially as the scarcity of names drives the value of existing domains up," added Dotster's DeCarlo.
| By Rebecca Morelle BBC News |
The US has indicated that it may give up some control of net domain names.
The US government currently oversees the net's domain name system through the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann).
But at a hearing on Wednesday a government official said the US was "committed" to the transition to private domain name control".
However, a policy statement issued last year asserted the US would not give up overseeing domain names like .com.
These root domain names include .com, .net and .org.
| | We remain committed to the private sector management of the domain name system US government |
Icann, a California-based not-for profit company, was given the task of coordinating and managing the domain name system in 1998.
This includes the allocation of internet protocol numbers, the unique number given to every online device, as well as the assignment of domain names and deciding whether root-level names such as .com, .net or .org, can be added to the internet.
Currently the US Commerce Department oversees Icann, and any major changes to the domain name system need to be submitted for approval to the US Commerce Department.
But the deadline for the full privatisation of Icann is 30 September 2006, although the US department has the option to delay the hand-over, and the meeting on Wednesday formed part of the public consultation to determine whether the company is ready to stand alone.
Sea-change
John Kneuer, a representative of the US Commerce Department, told the meeting: "We remain committed to the private sector management of the domain name system."
This seemed to mark a sea-change from a statement issued in June 2005 by the government that asserted the US intended to retain its control of top-level root domain names to preserve the security and stability of the net domain name system.
This caused consternation within the international community when it was announced; with some countries stating they were concerned the US had too much control and suggesting that net oversight should shift to the United Nations or another international organisation.
| | Ultimately, we would like to see a private sector solution Emily Taylor, Nominet |
And Icann hit controversy again in May 2006, when it rejected a plan for a new .xxx domain name, for sexually explicit sites, a move that some condemned as politically motivated.
Almost 700 people from around the world submitted written evidence to the hearing.
A number of the submissions stated: "No single Government should have a pre-eminent role in internet governance."
While Margarita Valdes, president of the Latin American and Caribbean Top Level Domain Organization, wrote: "The US government needs to lessen its perceived and actual influence on day-to-day operations of Icann and its role with the domain name system."
Transition time-line
But others at the meeting said that while the aim should remain the full privatisation of Icann, the company was not yet ready to become fully sustainable.
Emily Taylor, director of legal and policy at Nominet, the UK internet name registry for domain names ending in .uk, spoke at the hearing.
She told the BBC News website: "I think, from our perspective, Icann has done some good work, particularly in reforming the operation of the root.
"But [the transition] is all a question of timing. We are reasonably relaxed about the timeframe. We think the current system works well, and we do not really have an operational problem with the US government's involvement.
"But, ultimately, we would like to see a private sector solution. That was the original vision when Icann was set up in 1998.
"What was very positive from our point of view was that there was a renewed commitment from the Department of Commerce to transition to privatisation."
The US government have said they will take the information from the meeting and the written submissions into account for their final verdict on Icann's status.
