OpenSRS: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
==Services== | ==Services== | ||
OpenSRS | OpenSRS offers the following services: | ||
* Domain Service- provides domain name registration for more than 100 | * Domain Service- provides domain name registration for more than 100 [[TLD]]s. | ||
* Trust Service- | * Trust Service- sells [[SSL]] certificates, website security (SiteLock and GeoTrust) and Truste Privacy policy plans. | ||
* Publishing Service- | * Publishing Service- offers goMobi, a website builder and hosting service for mobile phones. | ||
* OpenSRS Offers- provides opportunity for its | * OpenSRS Offers- provides opportunity for its resellers to offer [[Google]] Adwords credits without additional costs | ||
* Hosted Registrar Service (OpenHRS)- a cost effective solution registration infrastructure for registrars | * Hosted Registrar Service (OpenHRS)- a cost effective solution registration infrastructure for registrars<ref>[http://www.opensrs.com/site/services/domains Services]</ref> | ||
==ICANN Involvement== | ==ICANN Involvement== | ||
OpenSRS actively participates in the different activities and meetings of the [[ICANN|Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers]]. The company is represented by some of its staffs including Solomon Amoako <ref>[http://register.icann.org/cgi/attendees.cgi Pre-Registered Attendees]</ref> and Adam Eisner, who was present during the [[ICANN 41]] meeting in Singapore.<ref>[http://www.opensrs.com/blog/2011/06/icann-approves-new-gtlds-at-41st-international-meeting-in-singapore/ ICANN Approves New gTLDs at 41st International Meeting in Singapore]</ref> | OpenSRS actively participates in the different activities and meetings of the [[ICANN|Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers]]. The company is represented by some of its staffs, including [[Solomon Amoako]]<ref>[http://register.icann.org/cgi/attendees.cgi Pre-Registered Attendees]</ref> and [[Adam Eisner]], who was present during the [[ICANN 41]] meeting in Singapore.<ref>[http://www.opensrs.com/blog/2011/06/icann-approves-new-gtlds-at-41st-international-meeting-in-singapore/ ICANN Approves New gTLDs at 41st International Meeting in Singapore]</ref> The company's blog is also dedicated to providing information and updates about the events, issues, and policies being discussed within the ICANN community and entire domain industry. | ||
The company's blog is also dedicated | |||
In 2001, a group of OpenSRS | In 2001, a group of OpenSRS Registration Service Providers, along with a number of Internet Service Providers ([[ISP]]s) and Internet Presence Providers ([[IPP]]s), wrote a letter to former ICANN President [[Stuart Lynn]] regarding the claims of Roger Cochetti, [[Verisign]] Senior Vice-President of Policy, that the company was suffering from a massive unauthorized transfer of domain names. According to him, 24% of Verisign’s registrants did authorize the transfer of their domain names out of Verisign. This prompted Verisign to implement safeguards for their customers within the legal framework such asking registrants to submit a notarized statement that they wish to transfer their domain names from Verisign to another registrar. Cochetti also requested ICANN to develop new policies regarding the issue. <ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/cochetti-to-lynn-16jul01.htm Letter from Roger Cochetti to Stuart Lynn, 16 July 2001]</ref> | ||
The OpenSRS RSPs and ISPs/IPPs denied Cochetti’s claims and argued that the survey was inconsistent. The group explained that the ISPs/ IPPs handled the domain name registrations for their customers for many years with their consent. According to them, their customers expected that their ISPs/IPPs to transfer their domain names on their behalf when company’s like Tucow and BulkRegister.com offered competitive price for domain name registration. In addition, the group emphasized that the domain transfer were done to provide better service for their customers. In connection, the group informed ICANN that the strategy implemented by Verisign regarding the transfer of domain names is not effective and it is a delaying tactic until the domain names pass the renewal date and Verisign will have a reason to deny transfers and asked customers to pay the $35 renewal fee before releasing the domain names. They pointed out that Verisign’s action is anti-competitive and they feel offended of being accused of conducting“[[domain slamming]].” They requested ICANN to reject Verisign’s proposal for the development of policies that prohibiting domain transfers.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/walsh-letter-to-lynn-20jul01.htm Letter from William Walsh (and Others) to Stuart Lynn, 20 July 2001]</ref> | The OpenSRS RSPs and ISPs/IPPs denied Cochetti’s claims and argued that the survey was inconsistent. The group explained that the ISPs/ IPPs handled the domain name registrations for their customers for many years with their consent. According to them, their customers expected that their ISPs/IPPs to transfer their domain names on their behalf when company’s like Tucow and BulkRegister.com offered competitive price for domain name registration. In addition, the group emphasized that the domain transfer were done to provide better service for their customers. In connection, the group informed ICANN that the strategy implemented by Verisign regarding the transfer of domain names is not effective and it is a delaying tactic until the domain names pass the renewal date and Verisign will have a reason to deny transfers and asked customers to pay the $35 renewal fee before releasing the domain names. They pointed out that Verisign’s action is anti-competitive and they feel offended of being accused of conducting“[[domain slamming]].” They requested ICANN to reject Verisign’s proposal for the development of policies that prohibiting domain transfers.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/walsh-letter-to-lynn-20jul01.htm Letter from William Walsh (and Others) to Stuart Lynn, 20 July 2001]</ref> | ||
| Line 43: | Line 42: | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{reflist}} | {{reflist}} | ||
[[Category:Companies]] | [[Category:Companies]] | ||
[[Category:Registrars]] | [[Category:Registrars]] | ||
__NOTOC__ | |||
Revision as of 05:45, 13 January 2012
 | |
| Industry: | Internet |
| Founded: | 1999 |
| Ownership: | Tucows |
| Headquarters: | Toronto |
| Country: | Canada |
| Website: | www.opensrs.com |
| Blog: | OpenSRS Blog |
| Facebook: | OpenSRS |
| LinkedIn: | OpenSRS |
| Twitter: |  @OpenSRS
|
| Key People | |
| Elliot Noss, President & CEO | |
OpenSRS is the domain name reseller services division of Tucows, a company based in Canada engaged in providing domain names and other Internet-related services. The company has a portfolio of more than 11 million domain names.[1]
Background
In January 2000, the OpenSRS platform was launched by Tucows after the company received its registrar accreditation from ICANN in April 1999. The company began registering domain names under the .com, .net and .org domain space, later that year adding the ccTLDs .ca (Canada), .uk (United Kingdom), .tv (Tuvalu), .cc (Cocos), .us (United States), .cn (China), and .de (Germany), as well as the .info, .biz, and .name gTLDs. In 2007, Tucows opened a wholesale reseller services division, OpenSRS Resellers.[2]
Services
OpenSRS offers the following services:
- Domain Service- provides domain name registration for more than 100 TLDs.
- Trust Service- sells SSL certificates, website security (SiteLock and GeoTrust) and Truste Privacy policy plans.
- Publishing Service- offers goMobi, a website builder and hosting service for mobile phones.
- OpenSRS Offers- provides opportunity for its resellers to offer Google Adwords credits without additional costs
- Hosted Registrar Service (OpenHRS)- a cost effective solution registration infrastructure for registrars[3]
ICANN Involvement
OpenSRS actively participates in the different activities and meetings of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. The company is represented by some of its staffs, including Solomon Amoako[4] and Adam Eisner, who was present during the ICANN 41 meeting in Singapore.[5] The company's blog is also dedicated to providing information and updates about the events, issues, and policies being discussed within the ICANN community and entire domain industry.
In 2001, a group of OpenSRS Registration Service Providers, along with a number of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and Internet Presence Providers (IPPs), wrote a letter to former ICANN President Stuart Lynn regarding the claims of Roger Cochetti, Verisign Senior Vice-President of Policy, that the company was suffering from a massive unauthorized transfer of domain names. According to him, 24% of Verisign’s registrants did authorize the transfer of their domain names out of Verisign. This prompted Verisign to implement safeguards for their customers within the legal framework such asking registrants to submit a notarized statement that they wish to transfer their domain names from Verisign to another registrar. Cochetti also requested ICANN to develop new policies regarding the issue. [6]
The OpenSRS RSPs and ISPs/IPPs denied Cochetti’s claims and argued that the survey was inconsistent. The group explained that the ISPs/ IPPs handled the domain name registrations for their customers for many years with their consent. According to them, their customers expected that their ISPs/IPPs to transfer their domain names on their behalf when company’s like Tucow and BulkRegister.com offered competitive price for domain name registration. In addition, the group emphasized that the domain transfer were done to provide better service for their customers. In connection, the group informed ICANN that the strategy implemented by Verisign regarding the transfer of domain names is not effective and it is a delaying tactic until the domain names pass the renewal date and Verisign will have a reason to deny transfers and asked customers to pay the $35 renewal fee before releasing the domain names. They pointed out that Verisign’s action is anti-competitive and they feel offended of being accused of conducting“domain slamming.” They requested ICANN to reject Verisign’s proposal for the development of policies that prohibiting domain transfers.[7]