Blog: Espresso Registry System

The COI + the EBERO: A Recipe to Create Failed Registries

ICANN’s current plan for a Continued Operations Instrument (COI) is a self-insurance scheme that asks registries to tie up a massive amount of cash, when much cheaper and more sensible options are available. The COI is a massive barrier to entry for all applicants, and one that hits smaller registries and those from developing countries with disproportionate weight. The COI requires massive amounts of cash to be set aside in case of business failure. It is so punitive that it will certainly encourage falsely conservative sales volume estimates by applicants, and likely to lead to higher prices for registrants. Combined with the Emergency Backend Registry Operator (EBERO) RFI, it will rob developing registries of much-needed funding during their critical first few years, and use the funds from the resulting failures to reward large incumbent registries. This is not a conspiracy theory — several incumbent registries, notably Afilias, also recognize this plan as dumb and have been working actively to make it more sensible: all boats float on a rising tide, and sink together too.

While registrants do need to be protected against registry failure, the ICANN formula for the COI seems much better calculated to cause registry failures than to prevent them.

The requirements for the COI are given in Question 50 of the Application Guidebook. Basically, the applicant has to set aside funds (or get a letter of credit) to assure “core registry functions” for 3 years. Core registry functions are: access to the shared registry system; Whois, DNS resolution; data escrow; and DNSSEC. That sounds reasonable enough until you start to get into the details — and the difference between what this would actually cost and what ICANN wants set aside.

At a recent session at the ICANN Dakar meeting dedicated to the COI, no-one spoke in favor of the current COI requirement. A registry stakeholder group proposal that would pool the risk was shot down by intellectual property interests, who predictably were not in favor of a mandatory payment to protect others (large companies will have no problem coming up with the COI). Others insisted that the pool was a form of insurance, and ICANN should not be in the insurance business. But some preliminary ideas toward the solution proposed in this post did receive some support. The way forward is provide estimates of actual likely costs, instead of the “sky is falling” scenario that the current plan envisages. Several groups are working to gather such data to present to ICANN. This post critiques the current system and provides an outline for a way forward.

Delay Is Not an Option

A short but important point: changing the amount of the COI does not mean a delay: it is not a change in policy, it is only a method for more reasonably estimating cost. The EBERO RFI, as the name implies, is a request for information. This too can be modified within the parameters of existing policy. Everyone involved in trying to reform this crazy mechanism has spoken out against any delays.

The Amount of the COI Is Directly Tied to the EBERO

Quoth the Guidebook:

The Continuing Operations Instrument (COI) is invoked by ICANN if necessary to pay for an Emergency Back End Registry Operator (EBERO) to maintain the five critical registry functions for a period of three to five years. Thus, the cost estimates are tied to the cost for a third party to provide the functions, not to the applicant’s actual in-house or subcontracting costs for provision of these functions.

Note that ICANN is building a model for these costs in conjunction with potential EBERO service providers. Thus, guidelines for determining the appropriate amount for the COI will be available to the applicant. However, the applicant will still be required to provide its own estimates and explanation in response to this question.

That’s what the Guidebook says, but that’s not what the EBERO RFI says. The EBERO is filled with extraneous requirements that have nothing to do with core registry functions, with the result that only large incumbent registries can qualify.

What Are the Real Costs of Transitioning a Failed Registry?

A registry stakeholder group presentation estimates that the current system would require a registry with 100,000 names in Year 3 to set aside $450,000, and a registry with 1,000,000 names in Year 3 to set aside $4,500,000. Will this kill any growing business? Is this more than most registries’ estimated profit margin? Is this completely crazy? Yes, yes, and yes.

You would think that ICANN would have done some research into the real costs of providing these five core functions to a failed registry. Maybe they did, but it doesn’t show. Let’s look at what it will actually cost. There are a few answers:

• The first and most likely answer is “almost nothing,” because the registry service provider of a failing registry can easily be persuaded to continue these operations (M+M guarantees it for their clients). That’s because in their assessment the risk is low (or they wouldn’t work with the registry in the first place) and because their incremental cost to do so is in fact near zero.
• A second answer is also “almost nothing,” because even supposing the registry operator *in addition to the registry* were to fail (a very low likelihood), in most cases any other registry service provider would be happy to pick up the names, since their incremental costs to run additional names are also near zero (there are transition costs, but these are not great — M+M transitioned a sizable zone over a weekend).
• A third answer is the ICANN way: multiply the estimated volume registrations by a dollar amount to be determined by the results of the EBERO RFI — which is only open to the most expensive incumbent registries, who charge orders of magnitude more than smaller, perhaps more efficient registries. (As one example among many, VeriSign charges $7 per name per year for .com names; Minds + Machines and many of its competitors charge less than $2 at a fraction of the volume of .com — and per-unit costs generally fall with increased scale).

Fortunately, there are plenty of examples of transition costs drawn from both the ccTLD and gTLD world that provide actual costs, and there is an effort to gather up these examples and provide them to ICANN, to give them cover (sigh) to do something sensible.

Accrediting Registry Service Providers

ICANN doesn’t like Answers 1 and 2, because (they say) “How do we know that the new registry service provider can do the job?”

Actually, the question should be reframed, “Why don’t you know?” because frankly they should know already. ICANN’s reluctance to accredit registry service providers is the greatest source of unnecessary cost and delay in the post-application period.

Without a doubt the biggest inefficiency of ICANN’s new gTLD process is the silly requirement of answering the entire tech section for each and every application. There are only a few registry service providers — Minds + Machines is one of perhaps ten — and nearly every application will use one of them. Although it’s theoretically possible to file an application for a system that’s not yet built, the level of detail required by the application effectively requires an existing, working registry. And yet for each new gTLD application, the tech section, the bulk of the application, will be reviewed anew in its entirety. So if there are 1000 applications, the evaluation of the tech section will be duplicated effort for 990 of them. I defy anyone to defend this as sensible.

Why did ICANN not simply accredit registry service providers, so that applications using accredited providers would not need to be tested and retested. Given that the application fee is based on cost recovery, an accreditation process would surely have reduced the $185,000 to something more manageable. Now that this opportunity has passed, accrediting registry providers for the five core registry functions is surely possible.

Happily, the fix is within reach and will not require further policy development or delay, if only ICANN comes to its senses. One obvious solution lies in amending the current EBERO RFI. In fact, amending the EBERO RFI could result in huge cost and time savings across the board.

The EBERO: Gold Mine for Incumbent Registries, Paid for by Applicants

The EBERO as written could be retitled the “Incumbent Registry Free Money RFI.” It is in fact a registry service provider accreditation program, but only for the chosen few. It is written to exclude any provider who is not a high-volume incumbent, assumes a .com-like one-size-fits-all model, and includes pages of requirements that have nothing to do with providing “core registry services,” even though Question 50 of the Guidebook links the two explicitly. In fact, the EBERO is filled with requirements that aren’t required of applicants in the Guidebook. Why are they required here?

Here are some examples of overreaching EBERO requirements (picked from among many such entries):

• High Capacity traffic service capability
• Ability to handle up to 20,000 concurrent client connections and a daily minimum peak volume of 2 million transactions with a read/write ratio of 10/1 (based on an estimated 1 million aggregate domains in the EBERO).
• Provide examples of thought leadership, industry participation, and publications that highlight your experience ["Thought leadership" as a technical requirement? - puh-leeze!]
• Ability to support and maintain IDN registrations
• Multiple DNS service locations that are geographically diverse and can be demonstrated to fully serve global resolutions
• Ability to accept live call volumes from an estimated user base of 300 and an expected contact rate of 15-20% during emergency migration periods without queuing times exceeding 10 minutes

The list goes on, one gold-plated requirement after another. The problems with this approach are manifold, but they all stem from the idea that one registry service provider should be able to handle *any and all* failing registries. That’s just plain silly — why not accredit a diversity of registry service providers as EBERO candidates and then assign failing registries to them according to the requirements of the registry?

Why the EBERO Doesn’t Make Sense As Written

The EBERO doesn’t pass the sniff test:

• Even though the most likely scenario for registry failure is an inability to sell as many names as estimated, resulting in a registry with few names, the EBERO calls for high-volume experience only. If anything, they should be looking for low-volume experience.
• If the failing registry doesn’t sell IDNs, why should the EBERO support them?
• If the failing registry only has 3 registrars, why should the EBERO support 300 concurrently?
• Data escrow, one of the five core registry services, is by definition outsourced. DNS is not outsourced necessarily, but in many cases it makes good sense both financially and technically (for redundancy) to do so. Why does the EBERO need to provide DNS services? ICANN could easily ask for EDNS (Emergency DNS) providers — they would line up to provide reasonably priced services.
• The EBERO as drafted assumes (unreasonably) that it will take 3 years to find a new home for the registry. Instead of providing a gold mine to large incumbent registries with little obligation, why not ask EBERO’s to provide a permanent home? In that case the funding wouldn’t need to cover three years — more like three weeks at the outside.
• Why should billing be suspended during the emergency period? If functions are being provided as normal, why not accept renewals at least, if not new registrations? This would substantially reduce the amount needed in the COI.

The EBERO as written is perfect for the fool who gives away millions of .BLAH registrations and then finds that no-one wants to renew them for money. For everything else, it’s overkill, and tying the COI for all registries to the cost of rescuing .BLAH is unreasoningly punitive. ICANN is asking all applicants to tie up precious cash reserves to cover for ICANN’s poor planning in this regard, and the result will be that new registries will find it hard to market their new TLDs in the critical first years of their registries — leading, inevitably, to registry failures.

Fix the EBERO, and the COI Suddenly Becomes Reasonable

ICANN should ditch the one-size-fits-all EBERO specification, and change it to accept a diversity of models, and rate registry service providers for volume of names, IDN capabilities, and some other criteria. Most of all, they should be rated on their ability to provide the required core registry services, and not on the number of gold-plated toilet seats they have. Once rated, these providers would be accredited for the capabilities they provide. Will this take a while? Maybe, but no new registry will be online for over a year. ICANN should also ask for Emergency DNS providers, since DNS can be easily provided independently of the Shared Registration System. DNS prices in the open market range from free to expensive — again, one size does not fit all. Overall, the prices for emergency services would drop drastically, and the effect would be to re-price the COI at a reasonable amount.

In a free market, registry service providers would be lining up to provide transition services for free if they were allowed to collect renewal fees for a certain period of time. Why is this not allowed in the EBERO? Only in extreme cases would there be no takers, and only then should a larger payment be invoked. The EBERO as written is a gift to large incumbent registries to pick up distressed registries (probably permanently, because why should they move again?), leaving aspiring applicants to pay for their gain via the COI.

There is a better way, and if ICANN (and, ahem, the GAC) actually gave a thought about the real-world issues faced by small registries or those from developing countries, they would insist on tying the COI to a real-world cost, and they would resist give-aways to incumbents through a guaranteed-income scheme paid for by struggling newbies. The COI and EBERO severely reduce choice and competition, and the security they promise is illusory and unsupported by experience or fact. They need to be changed, and the way to do it is to widen the field of emergency providers and thereby reduce the cost of the COI.

Last week, we put out a press release announcing new pricing for top-level domain registry services. We called it “revolutionary.” Really?

The Internet revolution proclaimed by ICANN last week will only happen if there are enough cool, useful, or experimental TLDs to justify the mantra of choice and innovation that accompanied the approval of new gTLD program. If it’s more of the same old mush, it’ll be like television: lots of channels, repetitive programming, stuffed with ads.

For the TLD space to flourish, we’re going to need some inventors. And yet a variety of impediments conspire to keep innovators out, including a steep entry fee, a scary application, and hordes of consultants emphasizing every difficulty in order to get their price up.

It all looks very complicated and expensive from the outside. But it doesn’t have to be that way. Yes, it’s daunting, but so is going to college, or going on a date, things that people do it all the time. Getting a TLD is possible for anyone with intelligence, energy — and money. The ICANN pricing is fixed; the price for registry services and consulting is variable. That’s why reasonable, clear, predictable pricing for registry services may be the difference between the difference between a starting a great new TLD and walking away.

In the end it’s the cost of new gTLDs — not the complexity — that will deter smart and determined people. The 350-page applicant guidebook is (with effort) understandable; the ICANN acronyms are learnable; the application fillable. Except for the technical portion, every part of the ICANN application can be completed by anyone with decent business experience and a willingness to read and absorb the guidebook and accompanying materials. There will be a free support system: ICANN has a whole team set up to answer questions, and all the questions will be public, so that you can learn from other people’s queries.

We can’t change the ICANN fee, and we can’t tell other service providers what to charge. But what we can do is take away a big question mark for applicants: how much will I be paying for registry services?

For a flat annual fee of $100,000, you can register as many names as you like, and we’ll also provide you with the answers to the technical part of the application. For the smart determined entrepreneur, that may be 90% of the battle. And if you fit our criteria for disadvantaged applicants, our annual fee is only $50,000.

So why is Minds + Machines doing this? Simple: we want to lead the market to more rational pricing. We know that many small ccTLDs are run simply and efficiently, and that this is possible in the new gTLD world as well. We think we’ll get more customers with reasonable, user-friendly pricing. Finally, because although registry service providers must operate to a high standard of reliability, the services are in the end automated and therefore should be cheaper in scale: the same dynamic that we see in all other parts of the Internet. We don’t think that charging high prices by making registry services sound as if they’re some kind of esoteric magic is a sustainable business model.

Minds + Machines, as well as the entire top-level domain space, will do better with more choice and innovation among new gTLDs. And a lot of that depends on price. Is our pricing revolutionary? If it helps create more choice and more innovative gTLDs, then it is.

While new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) wait for ICANN to announce an application date, country-code top-level domains (ccTLDs) continue to migrate in large numbers to CoCCA, the registry software system which shares a codebase with Minds + Machines’ Espresso registry system.

Dot Masr, the Arabic-script ccTLD for Egypt, successfully deployed today on the CoCCA system. The National Telecom Regulatory Authority of Egypt (NTRA) has deployed its production domain name registry system for Egypt’s internationalized domain name country-code top-level domain (IDN ccTLD).

Egypt joins Kenya (.ke), Madagascar (.mg), Mauritius (.mu), Nigeria (.ng), Cameroon (.cm), Mozambique (.mz) , Namibia (.na), Egypt ASCII (.eg) and several other African countries in deploying the CoCCA registry system. In the second quarter of 2010 alone, six ccTLDs have migrated to CoCCA: Greenland (.gl), Guernsey (.gg), Jersey (.je), Palestine (.ps); and American Samoa (.as) will be migrating to CoCCA. By a wide margin, CoCCA is the most widely deployed top-level domain registry system in the world, supporting over 30 ccTLDs.

Minds + Machines has been selected to provide registry services by Bayern Connect GmbH, which is pursuing the .BAYERN top-level domain name for Bavaria. We are delighted to be chosen by this very strong applicant.

The press release from Bayern Connect quotes CEO Caspar von Veltheim:

“We need a strong and stable technical infrastructure to take our place among existing top-level domains,” said von Veltheim. “We are therefore using the Espresso platform, which powers over a dozen country-code top-level domains, is used by ICANN worldwide to demonstrate security best practices, and can deliver domain names for Bavarians at a fraction of the cost of other solutions.”

Bayern Connect’s choice of Minds + Machines to provide registry services is a natural evolution of our increasingly close relationship with CEO Caspar von Veltheim, who has also agreed to serve as Director of Minds + Machines Germany. In addition to the technical expertise provided by Minds + Machines, Bayern Connect has secured funding from Top Level Domain Holdings, Minds + Machines’ parent company.

Bayern Connect has already presented its project to the Bavarian State Government, and has the support of major Bavarian businesses and institutions, as well as important cultural figures. Prince Leopold von Bayern, a long-time advocate for the preservation of Bavarian traditions, is serving as Senior Advisor. “With .BAYERN, Bayern Connect will give Bavaria a home on the virtual Internet,” said the Prince.

Responding to concerns from intellectual property owners, Bayern Connect is being advised by Dr. Andreas Schulz, a prominent intellectual property attorney. “Trademark owners are entitled to a fair and transparent system by which the domain names are allocated. I will help Bayern Connect develop policies that will assure this,” said Dr. Schulz.

As a Bavarian business, Bayern Connect will donate a substantial portion of the annual registration revenues to Bavarian charities and cultural organizations. “Bavarians will make .BAYERN succeed, and therefore we will give back to Bavaria,” said von Veltheim. Bayern Connect GmbH is based in Munich.

UPDATE Oct. 7, 2009 — It has been brought to my attention that there is an inaccuracy in one of the quotes from Caspar von Veltheim in the blog post above. ICANN does not and has not used Espresso to demonstrate security practices. In fact, ICANN itself doesn’t demonstrate anything. Instead, they work with a company called DeltaRisk, which used an older version of the CoCCA registry software (upon which Espresso and Espresso CC are based) for the demonstrations.

This summer the number of registrars on the Espresso CC platform, jointly developed by CoCCA Registry Services and Minds + Machines, has steadily grown with the migration of several ccTLDs onto the platform.

Recent grants from Minds + Machines have enabled the development of several gTLD desired features including: one-step EPP server, WHOIS server and key retrieval configuration; transfer activity reporting; one-click database back up; banded volume discount settings, and many other easy-to-use features for TLD operators.

The Espresso system is EPP-compliant; supports IPV6, ENUM, DNSSEC; allows shadowed domains to combat botnet attacks such as Conficker; enables IDNs (internationalized domain names); and supports and multiple language files (15 so far) allowing registrars to manage their accounts in their native language.

Minds + Machines, as CoCCA’s partner, is offering a fully ICANN-compliant version of Espresso for new generic top-level domains in 2010. CoCCA (the Council of Country Code Administrators) is a member-owned organization that provides services to ccTLD operators. CoCCA began as a cooperative of three ccTLD operators, .CX (Christmas Island), .GS (South Georgia), and .NF (Norfolk Island) on a quest to build a better registry platform and to share resources as a way of achieving economies of scale. The more members, the less each has to contribute toward development, attorney fees, and infrastructure. In four years CoCCA has grown 700% , with twenty-one members now sharing resources using world-class EPP technology.

On behalf of its members, CoCCA accredits registrars that agree to follow best-practice recommendations in the registry-registrar-registrant business model. We warmly welcome the most recently approved registrars, who are now able to offer to their customers registrations in CoCCA member TLDs.

Here are the newly-accredited registrars, in alphabetical order. Welcome!

• 3w Media GmbH
  
  




• Bizcn.com, Inc.
  
  




• Blacknight Internet Solutions
  







• BRS Media, Inc.
  







• cctldnames
  







• Communigal
  







• Cybernaptics Ltd.







• DomainClub.com
  
  







• DomainersChoice
  







• Domain Monster
  







• Domain The Net Technologies
  







• Domaine.fr
  







• Enom
  







• Entorno Digital S.A.
  









• Gandi SAS
  







• Larsen Data
  







• Maridan Internet
  







• Moniker
  
  







• Networking4all
  







• Niceweb.eu
  







• NovaGroup
  







• Oxwell
  







• Register.eu
  







• Reg.Net.ua
  







• Todaynic.com, Inc.
  







• Web Solutions ApS
  







• Webworkers Internet Consultants
  







• Xin Net Technology
  

We are very pleased to announce that BRS Media, Inc. has chosen Espresso CC as its new top-level domain registry platform .FM. All existing .FM names were migrated over the weekend and are functioning normally in their new home.

Welcome dotFM!

Here’s the text of the press release:

dotFM Chooses Espresso Registry Platform for .FM Top-Level Domain

JOINS 14 COUNTRIES NOW USING THE ESPRESSO PLATFORM TO BE USED BY MINDS + MACHINES FOR NEW WEB ADDRESSES

NEW YORK, Sept. 1 /PRNewswire/ — Effective today, BRS Media Inc., operator of dotFM, will use Espresso CC as the registry platform for the .FM top-level domain, home of last.fm and other prominent web addresses. Migration of all existing domain names to the new platform was completed in 48 hours over the last few days. .FM will utilize UltraDNS for domain name resolution.

.FM is the latest of 14 country-code domains to choose the Espresso CC registry platform to manage its top-level domain and to endorse the powerful Espresso platform – which Minds + Machines will use for the new top-level domains expected to launch next year.

Espresso CC, developed as a co-operative effort between CoCCA and Minds + Machines, is a next-generation registry services platform for country-code top-level domains (ccTLDs). Its rich feature set – combined with its long-established reputation for stability, ease of use and attractive pricing – has attracted growing interest and to date has been adopted by 14 ccTLDs. Its cousin Espresso, which is fully ICANN-compliant, will be used by Minds + Machines for the new generic top-level domains to be issued by ICANN early in 2010.

“After comparing several registry systems along with soliciting input from major registrars, we are pleased to have upgraded to the Espresso CC Registry Platform,” said George T Bundy, Chairman and CEO of BRS Media Inc. “With its impressive management features, field-tested stability, and fully integrated EPP compliance, the Espresso CC is the benchmark for the exciting future of dotFM.”

“We’re thrilled to see dotFM join the growing list of top-level domains that have chosen to rely on Espresso, and we look forward to providing this terrific platform to the new web addresses from ICANN that are creating so much excitement,” said Antony Van Couvering, CEO of Minds + Machines. “George Bundy is an Internet pioneer with long experience and his choice of Espresso is a huge vote of confidence that we’re very proud of.”

In addition to highly popular top-level domains such as dotFM, Minds + Machines provides capacity-building grants through CoCCA to emerging country-code registries – providing equipment, training and ongoing guidance as well as free implementation of the Espresso CC platform.

ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) will early next year begin accepting applications for top-level domains named after cities, companies, brands and entrepreneurial ventures. Minds + Machines has previously announced partnerships to provide registry services using the Espresso platform for proposed new web addresses including .eco (www.supportdoteco.com), .nyc (www.dotnyc.net), .roma (http://www.ildominiodiroma.it/index_eng.html) and .radio (http://www.dotradio.info)

ABOUT MINDS + MACHINES http://www.mindsandmachines.com

Minds + Machines works internationally with companies, cities, not-for-profits and entrepreneurs to secure and operate new web addresses, known as top-level domains (TLDs). Minds + Machines provides the comprehensive application preparation services necessary to acquire a new TLD, as well as a robust, scalable registry hardware and software platform used by over a dozen TLDs worldwide today. Minds + Machines is known for its customer-friendly approach that is specifically designed to make the process of acquiring and operating new TLDs more accessible, more reliable and less expensive. Minds + Machines is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Top Level Domains Holdings, Ltd. (AIM: TLDH.L)

ABOUT BRS MEDIA http://www.brsmedia.fm

Based in the South of Market district (SoMa) of San Francisco CA, BRS Media (www.brsmedia.fm) is a member of the National Association of Broadcasters, the International Webcasting Association and the Webcaster Alliance. Listed as one of the fastest growing privately held companies by the SF Business Times and Inc. Magazine, its portfolio of Online properties includes: dotFM & dotAM, domain registrar of premium multimedia .FM and .AM domains; dotRadio, the new .RADIO top level domain for the On Air and Online Community; iDotz.Net domain registrar of all gTLD domains (.com, .net, .org), as well as, boutique domains (.tv .la, .im, .vc & .mn); @Radio.FM & @Radio.AM, free Web based email services and the ever-popular Web-Radio, the leading portal for “tuning in” Radio on the Internet. dotFM, dotAM and dotRadio are either registered trademarks or trademarks of BRS Media, Inc.

Over the last few months we’ve been assisting CoCCA founder Garth Miller to help developing-nation country-code top-level domains upgrade their knowledge and infrastructure through the Minds + Machines Capacity Building and Grant Program. This program has so far funded regional workshops in southern Africa and the airfares to attend them, along with knowledge-transfer programs between regional ccTLDs. In addition, as we continue to improve the Espresso registry platform, we have introduced Espresso CC for country-code top-level domains, a high-quality EPP registry services platform for ccTLDs.

Today we’re happy to announce that Madagascar (.MG) has upgraded to the Espresso CC (country-code) registry platform.

To quote from the news page at CoCCA:

The Madagascar Network Information Center ( NIC-MG ) has completed their migration to the Espresso CC EPP registry platform…. NIC-MG has deployed a state of the art registry system, deployed a Whois server and is in the process of requesting ICANN update the the .mg ROOT-SERVER records to include anycast technology for maximum redundancy.

NIC-MG registry system will soon have off-site fail-over and escrow. DNSSEC is being studied with a view to deploy in the first quarter of 2010.

The changes in the technology being utilized by NIC-MG will be accompanied by a review of policy and procedures to address abuse of intellectual property rights, cyber-crime and protection of the public interest. The new system will allow local 24/7 registration and updates through various registrars, local ISP’s and other technology companies.

The complete manual for Espresso, our registry platform, is now available online. The online manual features each and every screen that a new top-level domain registry operator will use in day-to-day administration, along with helpful explanatory appendices and diagrams. As Espresso evolves and improves, the manual will be updated as well.

Please, have a look at the Espresso manual. Comments and questions welcome.

We sent out a press release today with the happy news that BRS Media has seleted us to provide application preparation and registry services for .RADIO. We love what BRS Media founder George Bundy has done with .FM, and he’s the absolutely hands-down no-questions indisputably the right person to do .RADIO. We look forward to strongly supporting his application through the application process and beyond.

Here’s the text of the press release:

SANTA MONICA, Calif., April 27 /PRNewswire/ — Minds + Machines, a leading registry services provider for new Top-Level Domains (TLDs), today announced that BRS Media, a diverse media e-commerce firm that helps media companies build brand influence on the Internet, has selected Minds + Machines to provide all technical services for the new .RADIO TLD.

In addition to providing critical registry services, Minds + Machines will guide dotRadio(TM) through ICANN’s intricate application process, which is required to create the .radio address. Minds + Machines specializes applying for and operating TLDs, providing registry software used by over 20 country-code TLDs.

“After reviewing all the options, the choice of Minds + Machines came easily,” said George T. Bundy, Chairman and CEO of BRS Media, Inc. “The deep experience of their staff, combined with their easy-to-use, field-tested software, made Minds + Machines the obvious choice. We are thrilled to be working with the most innovative company in the registry services industry.”

“BRS Media is an Internet legend,” said Antony Van Couvering, CEO of Minds + Machines. “They were pioneers in their field and today their name is synonymous with Internet radio. We could not be more pleased that they selected us. BRS Media’s recognized leadership in the Internet radio space, combined with our expertise in registry operations, means that .RADIO has a very bright future.”

The plan to launch .RADIO follows the decision by ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) to expand website and email addresses beyond the familiar .com, .net, .org and country-based extensions. Later this year, ICANN will for the first time accept applications for an unlimited number of new TLDs.

About BRS Media Inc.
BRS Media (www.brsmedia.fm) is a diverse and growing media e-commerce firm that helps traditional and interactive media companies build and brand on the power of the Internet.

About Minds + Machines
Minds + Machines provides an efficient, professional path to creating new top-level domains. Founded by a team of domain veterans who together have launched over 20 top-level domains, we provide assistance to cover the entire range of new TLD services – from application to operation. Minds + Machines is proud to support CoCCA, the not-for-profit shared registry system for country-code domains. More information is available at http://www.mindsandmachines.com.

Dot Eco Selects Minds + Machines to Provide Registry Services

MEXICO CITY (March 4, 2009). .ECO, a new top-level domain initiative for people who care about the environment, has selected Minds + Machines as their domain name registry operator. Minds + Machines will help .ECO with the ICANN application process, and handle .ECO’s domain registry services after ICANN approval.

“After comparing all the registry platforms, our choice was easy,” said Fred Krueger, CEO of .ECO. “Minds + Machines impressed us with their technology and their knowledge of the industry, as well as their commitment to sustainable development. They have a vision that goes beyond the technical aspects, and matches our vision of what the Internet can do for the environment and for world.”

.ECO will be established for individuals to express their support for environmental causes, for companies to promote their environmental initiatives, and for environmental organizations to maintain their websites in a namespace that is more relevant to their core missions. Dot Eco recently announced an integrated partnership with former Vice President Al Gore and the Alliance for Climate Protection.

“.ECO is an important next step for the Internet,” said Antony Van Couvering, CEO of Minds + Machines. “By claiming this important Internet identity, and backing it up with a real plan for action, .ECO is fulfilling the promise of the Internet to make a real difference for the planet. We could not be more pleased that they selected Minds + Machines.”

Minds + Machines has its roots in CoCCA Tools, the open-source shared registry platform for over twenty-five country-code top-level domains. By supporting CoCCA with funding and development, Minds + Machines is helping bring the Internet and an important Internet identity to many smaller countries in the world.

Minds + Machines, based in Los Angeles and New York, provides consulting and technology to corporate, community, and entrepreneurial new top-level domains.

Contact Antony Van Couvering, avc[at]mindsandmachines.com