Entries tagged with “ireland” from Domains / Internet Technology News - DNS News

IEDR Annual Report 2008 - More Fluff

| | Comments (1)
So what does a ccTLD operator do when they're worried about cashflow?

They go off and spend thousands on a glossy annual report obviously!

iedr-report-cover.jpg

The IEDR's annual report and review for 2008 is the glossiest one they've produced to date. As usual it contains plenty of fluff while ignoring anything of substance.

In the Chairman's introductory statement they reveal that:

"The board has agreed terms of reference for a Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) to advise on .ie namespace policy matters, the membership to be representative of relevant stakeholder organisations"


Well that's charming.
The document that was being discussed between the IEDR and its resellers was firmly slanted in the IEDR's favour and had not been accepted by the reseller community.
So now it looks like the IEDR have done what they always do and unilaterally implemented a change without accepting feedback from the companies that pay their bills (registrars / resellers) or those that give them a raison d'etre (registrants).

Scanlan goes on to infer that the IEDR have been appointed as the registry operator for the .ie namespace permanently. This is not the case, unless whoever wrote the Comreg documents is a very bad communicator, which I somehow doubt.

Making repeated reference to the Comreg report is annoying, as Comreg did not actually publish the report of the external consultants. All that was published was the result of the public consultation - and even that was months behind schedule and did not reveal anything really meaty.

So what about the rest of this year's report?

Well it has got lots of plenty glossy photos of IE registrants (Why aren't they using this in publications that the public see???) there isn't a huge amount of substance.

iedr-report-image-1.jpg

The report states the following about the aftermarket which underlines the level of their ignorance

".. Furthermore, there is no secondary market for .ie domains, which reduces the incentive for 'domainers' to engage in cybersquatting and domain warehousing"

So all "domainers" are "cybersquatters"?

Why does the IEDR have such a ridiculous fear of the secondary market?

Other registry operators such as AFNIC, which also restricts registrations to some degree, do not see aftermarket activity in such negative terms.

It could also be argued that the registry's restriction on trade in domains is unlawful

One could also argue that the IEDR's current "managed registry" model, whatever that is exactly, contravenes Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

In case you're not familiar with that specific article here it is:

"ARTICLE 10

   1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. this right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
   2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary. "


Has anyone ever challenged the consitutionality of the IEDR's stance?

As a body that draws its powers from Comreg's regulation and Irish legislation it cannot continually use the excuse of being a private company.

But I still fail to see how the IEDR can justify the expense of a glossy report like this yet be incapable of communicating an important policy change to its stakeholders (sole traders may now register their surname). Spending money on improving their communications with stakeholders would appear to be a better way of investing their funds.

Do Comreg care enough to actually act?

Or will they sit idly by while the IEDR cherrypick which voices to hear and implement policy changes with little or no real input?

UPDATE: I've attached the full report (4.2 MB PDF):
IEDR AN Report 08-web.pdf


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

IEDR Attempts Transparency

|
The IEDR, the body that is responsible for .ie domains (Ireland), is currently consulting with its resellers about introducing a greater level of transparency.

At the moment there is very little transparency with respect to the sales rank of the various companies that offer .ie domain registration services. The IEDR's own newsletter refers to the companies by letter!

If the new system is implemented then we would finally be able to confirm who actually is handling the volumes and who is just "spinning" ...

While it's impossible to say what the outcome of the consultation will be there have already been some negative comments mentioning "commercial sensitivity"!

Considering that most other registries provide the information either directly or indirectly you'd have to wonder what people were so worried about.

Disclosure: I run one of the largest IE resellers and am in favour of publishing the names.
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

DotMobi CEO Shortlisted For Award

|
mobi logo
Trey Harvin, CEO of dotMobi, has been shortlisted for the Mobile Internet Innovation award in this year's Irish Internet Association Net Visionary awards.

DotMobi has been promoting their Instant Mobilizer service to website / domain owners to encourage them to make their websites "mobile friendly".

Public voting is currently open, so why not cast your vote?

The awards ceremony is scheduled to take place in Dublin on May 21st 2009 as part of the Association's annual congress.

Comreg Finally Publish IEDR Report

| | Comments (7)
Although it's several months later than announced, Comreg (Irish Communications Regulator), has finally published its report on the consultation of IEDR and the IE ccTLD.

The regulator published a press release (below) as well as all submissions received and the consultation conclusions based on the submissions.

The Commission for Communications Regulation (ComReg) has today published its
Response to Consultation on a new framework for the regulation and management of .ie,
Ireland's Top Level Domain (TLD), which is part of the Internet's global Domain Name
System.
Under the Communications Regulation (Amendment) Act 2007, ComReg is responsible
for making regulations to ensure the effective management and administration of .ie in the
best interests of Irish consumers who use this national resource. The .ie domain is
currently managed by IE Domain Registry Ltd. (IEDR).
In June 2008, ComReg consulted on a wide range of issues and simultaneously conducted
a comprehensive independent review and due diligence analysis of IEDR's activities. The
Response to Consultation now describes the outcome of that process and outlines
ComReg's conclusions and decisions on a suitable regulatory framework for the .ie
domain. The main points are:
- ComReg will, by way of regulation, appoint IEDR as the authority authorised to
register .ie domain names in accordance with Section 32(4)(a) of the Act of 2007,
- IEDR will set up and maintain a Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) representative of
all stakeholders with a focus on more transparent policy development,
- IEDR will continue to adopt the "managed approach" to .ie registrations to ensure
continued protection for .ie domain name holders and consumers,
- ComReg will implement a monitoring framework and will participate in the PAC to
keep abreast of activities in the marketplace,
- Further regulatory measures may be considered in the future, as warranted.
The Response to Consultation (ComReg Document 09/01) and the full Consultation Paper
(ComReg Document 08/48) are now available on www.comreg.ie.



What still has not been disclosed is the external consultants' report which was presented over a year ago.

I will followup with more in depth analysis of the final document, but due to its nature I need to read it carefully.


Has the time come to redelegate IE namespace?

| | Comments (9)
 IEDR Logo
I've written extensively about the IE namespace and its current registry operator - IEDR in the past. While I've always tried to be fair and balanced in my coverage of the issues facing the IE namespace I'm afraid my patience with the current registry operator has worn thin.

While things may have improved over the course of the last few years it is becoming abundantly clear that the current registry operator is probably not the best organisation to manage the ccTLD in the future.

Comreg (the Irish Communications regulator) organised external consultants to conduct a comprehensive review of the IEDR's operations at every level. Although the report was submitted to Comreg before Christmas 2007 it still has not been published and is unlikely to see the light of day at this juncture.

More recently Comreg requested feedback based on the unpublished report's points (the logic behind this kind of thing escapes mere mortals, so you're not alone if you thought that was a weird thing to do!), yet nothing has been published.

Of course Comreg's track record in terms or regulating the various industries within its remit hasn't exactly been stellar, so maybe we shouldn't be so surprised.

So what is the current situation in IE?

If you were to rely on their annual report for that kind of information you'd probably end up with a rather twisted version of events.

At present there is no policy development process within IE.

While policy can change there is no clear way for stakeholders to propose changes or follow their development.

If a policy proposal is made and in many cases this appears to be provoked by something "upsetting" the registry operator, then the IEDR may pay lip service to consulting stakeholders. However consultation in their eyes and consultation for everyone else are often at odds with each other.

One recent change that has had a very negative impact on stakeholders was the registry's unilateral decision to practically do away with "conditional acceptances". That a domain could be "provisionally accepted" in the first place is a reflection of the archaic and unwieldy rules and procedures in place.

If you query how things operate you are most likely to get a rather inane response about how things have always been that way or that nobody "considered" a particular issue to be important enough to deal with.

Most of the ccTLD's registration rules are ambigous and open to subjectivity.

Since the "awarding" of a domain name relies almost entirely on the registry's staff subjective interpretation of the policies the end result is that prospective registrants and registrars are constantly locked in an unending game of "Russian roulette", though in many respects it's even worse, as you don't know how many chambers have been loaded.

In this kind of environment, with vague rules and no policy development, the incumbent registry operator now wants to introduce even more bureaucracy.

According to a small note in their most recent newsletter they intend to introduce an "appeals process":
The IEDR will shortly begin a consultation with the local internet community on the formation of a formal appeals process.

This formal appeals process would allow persons to:
a) appeal the IEDR's decision to reject an application for a new .ie domain name
b) appeal an already registered domain name
c) appeal the suspension or deletion of a .ie domain name

We will be circulating a consultation document for your consideration over the coming days


Eventually the IEDR provided more information on their proposal:


The IEDR would like to receive your views on the formation of a formal appeals process.
This formal appeals process would allow persons to:
a) appeal the IEDR's decision to reject an application for a new .ie domain name
b) appeal an already registered domain name
c) appeal the suspension or deletion of a .ie domain name

We would like to suggest adopting a two stage approach to the process. The purpose of this
approach is to reduce the number of inquiries escalated to a formal appeal and minimise the costs incurred by the appellant and/or the registry. The first stage of this approach would involve the IEDR being given the opportunity to review the appeal internally and respond. Our aim is to address the appellants' issue wherever possible at this stage, however if this is not possible or the appellant remains dissatisfied with our response they could then choose to initiate the second stage of process by opening a formal appeal which would be brought before an expert/panel of experts for a decision.

Currently, the IEDR receive very few appeals and do not feel that the introduction of a formal
process should increase the number received in any way (see (1) below). The purpose of this
consultation is to ensure that the formal process is structured to reflect the needs and
considerations of the local internet community.


While the idea behind this is obviously inspired by the Nominet DRS and similar solutions there is no way to easily transplant that kinf of sytem into the IE namespace. Other ccTLDs are much more member-driven ie. the stakeholders have some say in how the organisation is developed and run (AFNIC, Nominet, DENIC etc.,) while IEDR is a private company with zero accountability. The lack of clear and unambiguous rules and processes mean that both registrants (end users) and companies fulfilling the registrar role (there is no such role currently defined) face a very high degree of uncertainty. If any appeals process were to be introduced it would be a fiasco.

Fundamentally the IE namespace is in serious trouble.

The  organisation currently in charge of managing the namespace may have muddled along for the last few years, but it is showing itself to be severely lacking on both technical and non-technical aspects of the ccTLD's management.

The archaic rules and procedures are stifling development not only of the namespace but of online business in Ireland.

This morning, for example, all public facing web services related to the IE namespace were completely unavailable for a period of approximately two hours. During this period whois, the API and all other web services were completely unavailable.

At no time did the registry make any effort to contact its registrars to explain the downtime and when an "explanation" was finally provided it was incredibly vague and unhelpful. A gTLD registry operator has to meet SLA requirements. Why doesn't this kind of thing exist for a ccTLD?

For a ccTLD registry in a developed country this kind of technical ineptitude is worrying.

So what could, or should, be done?

The main area of contention is in regard to the rules and regulations. At present those rules and regulations are not helping anyone, least of all the user community that the ccTLD is meant to serve. It would make a lot more sense to do away with all registration restrictions apart from maybe an admin contact address restriction.

The IEDR has long argued that its position as a "managed" registry gave it certain advantages, however most registrants do not gain any tangible benefits from these supposed advantages.

With simpler rules there would be less manual intervention required by both the registry operator and the registrars which would improve the turnaround time on new registrations and also help reduce the cost to end users significantly (the average cost at present is approx 25-30 euro before sales tax). The cost that end users pay for a domain registration will always be affected by the amount of manual intervention (if any) that the registrar's staff has to make to get a domain registered and / or manage it on an ongoing basis.

The other area that needs to be addressed urgently is the total lack of properly defined relations between the registry, registrar and registrant. At present there are no official "registrars", as the IEDR has not drafted any form of registrar contract. This puts all three sides in a legal minefield and issues can and will arise, although querying this sort of legal issue with the registry will not get a favourable response.

Maybe things will change dramatically if and when Comreg publish their report, however if they don't then maybe it is time that the management of the registry be put up for public tender or simply redelegated entirely.


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

IEDR Are Hiring

|
IEDR Logo
The IEDR, which is in charge of the IE namespace, is looking for staff.

The position on offer is "team leader" in "registration services"

Full details are available from David Curtin, IEDR's CEO (david.curtin at iedr.ie)


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

IE Domain Registry To Introduce Multiyear Registrations

| | Comments (1)
IEDR LogoThe IE Domain Registry has announced that they will be enabling multiyear registrations of IE domains later this week.

From 6pm on Wednesday 13th 2008 it will be possible to register IE domains for 1,2,3,4,5 or 10 years at a time.

(Why you cannot register a domain for 6,7,8 or 9 years hasn't been explained as yet).

Consultation Period On IE Namespace Opening

|
Comreg, the Irish communications regulator, is starting a consultation process on the IE namespace.

The consultation paper is ComReg 08/48.

Unfortunately any links on the ComReg site to the aforementioned document are returning a 404 (not found) error at present, so it will probably be Monday before we will be able to see the document's contents.

EDIT: The links are now working again and the document is now available. In case it goes AWOL again I've made a copy available here as well
:

ComReg0848.pdf

One and Two Character Domains? Dotmobi and dotcoop

| | Comments (2)
Short domains are more memorable.

You can't really argue with that.

However a lot of registries don't allow them for a variety of reasons.

The Isle of Man is one of the few exceptions that springs to mind, as they allow pretty much any length, but charge more for the shorter ones.

The Irish domain registry does not allow two letter domains, but will allow two character domains. (There is one two letter IE domain which predates the registry).

In the big bad world of gTLDs releasing the one and two letter domains that are still available comes up for discussion from time to time. Stephane has posted recently about what's being going on with .mobi and .coop.

The .coop registry has been given approval to release two character domains, while both .coop and .mobi have been informed that their requests regarding single character domains do not pose any issue and have been referred to the ICANN board.

I'm not sure how popular .coop's domains will prove, but I expect the .mobi ones will be very popular and are bound to fetch very high prices if they are released via auction.

In any case it's doubtful if mere mortals will be able to afford them! :)

Fun and Games In the ccTLD World

|
There must be something in the air. I'm not sure exactly what it is, but there are a lot of things going on in the ccTLD world at the moment.

In the UK Nominet's AGM is being held this week. This would normally provoke a yawn from most people - it's an AGM - how exciting can that be? This year's AGM looks like it could be quite entertaining, although it probably isn't going to be particularly beneficial for its membership.

Over the last few weeks the private members' mailing list has been a veritable battleground. While some "healthy" discussion prior to an AGM and the election of various people might be expected, the activity over the past few weeks has gone from the sublime to the absolutely insane.

It seems to have all started shortly after the PAB election results were announced, though anyone trying to follow the tit for tat bickering may be excused for not being able to provide a concise timeline.

The board election debacle came to a head a few days ago when Nominet issued a warning to its members about their voting in the AGM. This of course led to even more debate and back and forth, which has probably confused quite a few people. There is, of course, a discussion (or two) on Acorn Domains.
A lot of the "action" seems to centre around "resolution 6", which members are meant to vote on at the AGM. The more vocal members seem to have split into two camps. You can read the opposing views here and here.

At the same time as some of Nominet's members are involved in a catfight the new gTLDs, which ICANN are supposedly introducing, came into the public eye again, with a new dotEng campaign being launched. I already mentioned the Scottish campaign for a .sco.

In Ireland the IEDR, which is the body responsible for the IE ccTLD, was subject to an external audit before Christmas. While the Irish Communications regulator (Comreg) had made promises of delivering a report to both stakeholders and the public nothing has been forthcoming to date. In the same period the Irish ccTLD topped the 100k name mark.

Over in France AFNIC is coming under fire, as the French communications regulator has opened up a consultation on who should be managing the French ccTLD and related entities that cater for the DOMTOM. It's an odd move on the French government's part, as AFNIC has always had state representation. Could we see .fr being run by a non-French company?
AFNIC are being quite gracious about the whole affair and issued a statement welcoming the process earlier this week, but who is to know what is going on behind closed doors...

And if that wasn't enough Denmark's ccTLD, .dk, is also coming under scrutiny. The dotDK group is tendering to run the registry, as they feel that the current system is far from ideal. Having dealt with DK Hostmaster's rather convoluted domain activation system I can't really argue with them!
What makes the dotDK project interesting for ICANN watchers is that Tina Dam, who has been working for ICANN for the last few years, is one of the main people involved. Francesco's article covers some of this in more detail.

And you thought ICANN was exciting?

IEDR Engages With Reseller / Registrar Community

|
IEDR LogoWhile a lot of registries have been engaging actively in dialogue with registrars and resellers the IE Domain Registry has been avoiding it for the last few years.

This finally changed with the launch of a private discussion forum for accredited IEDR resellers in the last few days.

To date the activity on the forum hasn't been relatively low key, but it will be interesting to see how things develop in the coming weeks and months.

A previous attempt at running mailing lists failed several years ago when the IEDR was under its former management.

eNum 353 Public Day

|
The Irish eNum registry is organising a public "user day" later this month:

Venue: Gresham Hotel, O'Connell St, Dublin 1
Date: Wednesday 28th November 2007
Time: 4.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m. (followed by drinks and snacks)

here will be no charge to attend the information session.
(parking available; close to DART and LUAS)

Agenda:

* Welcome and Introduction (IENUM)
* ENUM in Ireland (IENUM)
* ENUM in Austria (IPA)
* ENUM in the UK (BT)
* How to become an ENUM registrar (IENUM)
* ENUM - an Irish implementation (Soft Telecom)
* ENUM – an industry-led policy perspective (ENUM Policy Advisory Board)
* Open forum - Q&A
Objectives of the session:

• Share the experiences of ENUM in Europe, and understand the various business models used by registrars
• Inform about the benefits to service providers of being an ENUM tier 2 registrar
• Show how to become an ENUM registrar
• Discuss technical implementation details of ENUM and VoIP
• Share experience of a practical business implementation in Ireland -
ENUM as a tool to connect remote sites


IE Personal Names Open For Business

|
This morning the IE Domain Registry opened the rules up a little bit more. It is now possible to register yourname.ie if you have a tangible contact with Ireland ie. proof of address is required.

I spoke to IEDR's CEO, David Curtin, earlier today (I'm currently in LA) and he predicted that there would be over 1000 new domains registered before the end of this week. For a ccTLD of the size of IE one thousand additions to the zonefile in such a short period of time is quite significant.
Of course there are validation issues to be dealt with. Photocopies of passports maybe valid, but how legible will they be?

Scammers Targetting Owners of IE Domains Again

|
internetregisterscam.JPG
I just got that letter in the post this morning.

I must say I am touched - how sweet of them! But also how dumb!


IE Domain Registry Updates Policy on Personal Domains - Finally!

|
IEDR Logo
One of the more frustrating rules covering IE domains is that related to personal names. Under the current rules you can only register yourfullname.ie if you are a celebrity or trade under that name (there are workaounds, but they're not nice!).

I've been nagging the IE Domain Registry about this policy for quite some time (see my rant here) and several months ago they started a consultation process with their resellers (there being no official registrars at the moment). It was all agreed in principle and was given plenty of coverage in the media. Unfortunately the coverage was a little premature, as the policy hadn't been changed.

As of today, however, we now have a timeline for the policy change - think of it as a sunrise of sorts!

The IE domain registry issued a press release and documentation covering the new policy:

The IE Domain Registry (IEDR), the managed registry for Ireland’s dot-ie domain names, today announced the relaxation of the rules for registering personal dot-ie domain names for individuals. This policy relaxation comes into effect following full consultation with the dot-ie reseller community and industry organisations.  

 

Registration of personal domains will be available to individuals from Wednesday, 31st October, 2007. This follows a seven week notice period, to allow time for sole traders, professionals, politicians, trademark holders who have not already registered their .ie Internet address, to do so under existing non-personal domain categories.

 

The introduction of personal dot-ie domain names is a result of the increased popularity of social networking and blogging sites and the increasing number of individuals who are coming online.

 

The registration of personal domain names will be open to all individuals who can authenticate a claim to the domain name and who have a real and substantive connection to the island of Ireland. To authenticate a claim, a copy of an identification document is required, for example an Irish utility bill or driving licence. The name on the document supplied must match exactly the domain name applied for. This requirement ensures that the status of Ireland’s dot-ie namespace, as the world’s second safest country code top level domain, is maintained and protected in the future. Applications will be time-stamped to ensure fairness and transparency of the process.

 

Commenting on the introduction of dot-ie personal domain names, Mr. David Curtin, Chief Executive of the IE Domain Registry said, “The IEDR is pleased to announce the relaxation of rules for personal dot-ie domain names.  To maintain the integrity of the dot-ie domain namespace, which has negligible levels of cyber squatting and cyber crime, applicants will need to authenticate their claim by providing matching supporting documentation such as an Irish passport or utility bill.

 

This limited registration policy relaxation comes into effect following consultation with dot-ie resellers. The introduction of personal domain names was first proposed to internet service providers three years ago, but there was little interest due to expected low levels of demand. Since then the broadband take-up and popularity of social networking has created a desire for a personal presence on the Internet, which in turn will have a positive effect on the level of demand for personal dot-ie domain names. The IEDR has also significantly reduced its prices, which have fallen by 50% since 2003 and introduced key system changes that facilitate fast, automated and real time registration, which has reduced resellers’ process costs.”



Trademark Infringement Is Due To Negligence

| | Comments (11)
What do Bebo and Adidas have in common?

At first glance, probably very little, however they've both fallen prey to an Irish based domain squatting operation based in Dublin's Digital Hub.

Gabor Varga seems to think that he is a legitimate businessman, whereas trademark holders and their legal teams would probably have a very different view of his activities. In fact, if the WIPO decisions against Varga and his partner Jozsef Petho are anything to go by they could be safely classified as cybersquatters.

In the history of the IE namespace there have been a grand total of five cases that were taken to WIPO under the dispute policy. Of those 40% involved Varga and Petho, who are now trading as FirstPlex Ltd. If you look at the actual list of disputes lodged with the registry you'll also notice that there were claims lodged by Google for typosquatting that did not go as far as a WIPO decision.

In an interview on Irish national radio earlier today representatives of industry and Mr Varga talked about the article that appeared in last Sunday's edition of the Sunday Times, which I mentioned earlier.

The article, which was thoroughly researched by Mark Tighe, did not pull punches and why should it have? However Varga came across as mortally offended by the whole affair.

You would have to be insane, or have a very loose grip on reality, to find plausible the very idea that someone could register adidas.ie without considering  the brand name, which the company has built up since its formation in 1949. But that's just what was claimed in the WIPO case

However Varga is totally unashamed and actually claims that he's "not registering other people's domains".
This last comment was given in reply to the interviewer asking if Varga was "the Del boy of the internet" (see here or here for an explanation of the reference)

Varga went on to say that he considered the intellectual property owners to be negligent.

That's interesting. Unless I'm sorely mistaken isn't there an entire body of case law that would show otherwise? While there may not be an specific law on the Irish statute books to cover this form of intellectual property rights infringement, there are laws that would encompass it. And even if that were not the case Irish courts may draw influence from foreign caselaw. That being so it would come as little surprise to me if reference were made to the Lanham Act, under which companies such as Microsoft have sued squatters in the past, should someone decide to pursue Varga or Firstplex at a civil level instead of via WIPO.

Companies invest millions in building up their brands, as one of the panelists on the interview this morning, Joe White from Gandi,  reminded listeners.  Aren't they entitled to some level of protection?

If cybersquatting were a legitimate activity then it would have the backing of the domain parking companies, such as Sedo, Afternic, DomainSponsor et al. But it doesn't, because it simply isn't.

Of course it's easy to confuse domaining with squatting.

A lot of businesses in Ireland (and elsewhere)  are still getting to grips with the internet.

They haven't realised how important the choice and use of a domain name can be in driving sales, so they might not fully appreciate analogies posited by industry insiders that regard domain names to be on a par with physical real estate.

However if you were to read Kieren McCarthy's book on sex.com you'd change your mind quite quickly!

It's easy to confuse building up a large portfolio of domains with actual squatting and trademark infringement.


Feed Subscription

If you use an RSS reader, you can subscribe to a feed of all future entries tagged “ireland”.

Subscribe to feed Subscribe to feed

Tags