The definition of registry is becoming fuzzy.
Two of the most commonly misused words in mainstream articles about domain names are registrar and registry. Many publications use one when it should be the other.
A registrar is the company where you register a domain name, such as GoDaddy or Name.com.
A registry is the company that manages the top level domain name.
So if you register a .com domain name at GoDaddy, GoDaddy is the registrar and Verisign is the registry for the domain name.
Now, most DNW readers are aware of this. But I’ve started to run into a conundrum with the release of new top level domain names.
With new TLDs, there are often two companies referred to as registries.
For example, .Buzz is “owned” and marketed by dotStrategy. But the traditional technical registry tasks are handled by Neustar, the same company that is the registry for .biz and .us
Are both considered registries?
In this case, I often call Neustar the “back end registry provider” or the “technical registry provider”, but these terms are cumbersome. Sometimes I refer to dotStrategy as the “TLD operator” and Neustar as the “registry”.
I don’t have a good answer to this yet, but I am open to suggestions.
SoFreeDomains says
In the case of .Buzz, I think dotStrategy is the “registry” while Neustar is the “TLD operator”.
John T. O'Farrell says
Andrew
I like your idea of “TLD Operator” (meaning owner but not providing the registry services) and “Registry” as the actual provider of registry services.
However do we need to differentiate between a Registry that is providing outsourced services and a Registry that is the operator and provider of services?
Perhaps:
1) TLD Operator: Owner but no services
2) TLD Service Registry: A registry that provides outsourced services for the Operator
3) Registry: A traditional registry that is the operator and provider of registry services for a given domain.
An entity could be one, two or all three of the above names but would allow for the reader to know what capacity that entity was operating as for any particular domain.
Thoughts?
ras says
The correct terminology in the case of .buzz is: dotStrategy is the “registry”, Neustar is the “registry services provider”
DaveZ says
Personally, I find all that accurate. Andrew can use them and forward them to mainstream media, if ever.
Digital Address says
I second!
temphi says
I suggest using “registry” for the TLD owner/operator/marketer and “register” (as a noun) for the back end or technical registry provider.
This means that companies that run their own registries like Verisign would be both registry and register.
And companies that don’t run their own registry like .Buzz would be a registry, and the company that provides the back end technical services, ie. Neustar, would be the register.
A company could be one or more of registrar, registry, or register.
This proposal removes any need for the cumbersome terms above.
Andrew Allemann says
registry/ar/er would be even more complicated, I think
Antony Van Couvering says
This is how I look at it:
1. The Registry is the entity that signs the contract with ICANN. It is responsible for the rules of the registry (e.g., open or restricted), and it holds the equity interest in the asset.
2. The Registry Service Provider (RSP) is the infrastructure provider for the hardware that registrars connect to. Its job is provision the domain names for the registry and to push out zone files. Often it provides billing services (invoicing registrars) and for outreach to registrars, but its core function is the infrastructure. The RSP may be owned by the registry or it may be provided by a third party. It may or may not provide DNS services (this can also be outsourced).
3. The Registrar signs contracts with the Registry and connects to the RSP through the EPP protocol used today. It owns the relationship with the customer.
Any entity (or group of entities) can be one or more than one of these.
To solve your conundrum, I think the notion of Registry Service Provider (RSP) may help.
Antony
Andrew Allemann says
RSP…another acronym to add to the alphabet soup. I like it.
Minds + Machines is a registry, RSP and registrar, correct?
Kurt Pritz says
The Domain Name Associations is publishing a guide to promote consistent terminology that is understood by the general public. It is important to adopt a standard, understandable terminology if we are to bring home the message regarding the value and utility of domain names.
(1) Avoid use of acronyms that no one outside the Domain Name Industry understands, such as TLD, gTLD and so on. (I have been trying to write acronymless papers; it isn’t easy.) We use “domain names” or “new domain names” (or “web addresses”). We call the bit to the right of the dot: “domain name extensions,” or “domain extensions.”
(2) A “domain name registry operator,” or “registry operator,” is the entity contracting with ICANN. The registry operator is empowered to make all the business and technical decisions such as outsourcing business, marketing and technical services. (The terms “registry” and “registrar” are dictionary terms. We should include descriptive modifiers if we want the general public to understand what we are talking about.)
(3) “Registry service providers” provide a wide range of consulting services to domain name registry operators, including marketing, operating and business systems, and technical services. A subset of these registry service providers are the limited number of “DNS service providers.”
(4) “Domain name registrars” are GoDaddy, Web.com, InternetX, 1&1, HEG. Some registrars, but not all, are ICANN accredited registrars; some are accredited by their country-code domain name registries. There are also “domain name resellers.”
(5) To make it clear and ensure public recognition that “name.extension” is indeed a web address, write it as “www.name.extension”.
Kurt Pritz
Domain Name Association
Joseph Peterson says
@Kurt Pritz,
I completely agree that a mainstream audience is best served by intuitive terminology devoid of acronyms. Even something as familiar to domain industry insiders and IT prrofessionals as “TLD” bogs us down in an explanation that is usually irrelevant when talking to everyday people. Meanwhile domain “ending” or “extension” or “suffix” can dispense with that useless tangential talk altogether.
Referring to the “suffix” or “domain ending” or “extension” also saves us from explaining the technical difference between, say, 3LD strings registered in .CO.UK and SLD strings registered in .UK. Both suffixes are “extensions”, while only 1 of them is a TLD.
I applaud the DNA’s initiative.
Nevertheless, I would advocate against the “name.extension” convention you’ve outlined. It’s outdated. With hundreds of semantically meaningful nTLDs on the market nowadays, it simply isn’t true that the left-of-the-dot string constitutes the name.
More and more, we’ll see names spanning the dot. That was true years ago with websites such as Join.me. In their case, the name isn’t “Join”; unmistakably, the name is the full SLD + TLD phrase, “Join Me”. After 2014, that scenario will be too important to neglect. Take this domain as an example:
Off.Market
Clearly, the name is “Off Market” (for real estate) and not “Off”. So if the DNA publishes a guide saying that
Domain = http://www.Name.Extension,
then that guide will be outdated from the moment of birth.
It’s a tricky situation, but there are ways around the difficulty. If you want collaboration on that pamphlet, I’m game.