[gnso-dow123] Accuracy Proposal

[Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Policy Recommendations to the GNSO Council;

1) Registrars must take reasonable steps to investigate and correct data
accuracy complaints received via the Whois Data Problem Reporting System
(WDPRS);
        a) Registrars may also take action based on complaints received via
other means,
        
2) i) The investigation undertaken by a Registrar in response to a
complaint received via the WDPRS must include verification of the data
using at least one of the three following mechanisms;
        a) via email
        b) via telephone
        c) via postal mail
        
   ii) In the event that the Registrant fails to respond to an inquiry
made by a Registrar regarding data accuracy pursuant to 2i), the
Registrar must undertake to continue the verification by using either of
the other two methods that did not fail.

   iii) In the event that the Registrar has attempted to contact the
Registrant using at least two of the methods above per 2.i and 2.ii and
the Registrant cannot be contacted or has not responded for a period of
30 days starting from the time of the first inquiry, the Registrar must
either;
        a) Place the registration in "ON_HOLD" status with the applicable
registry pending correction of the inaccuracy.
        b) Cancel the registration.
        
3) In the event that the Registrant has provided updated contact
information pursuant to an inquiry made per (2), either
        a) the Registrant must certify the accuracy of the updated information.
        b) the Registrar must verify that the updated information can be used
to contact the Registrant.

   i) In the event that the Registrant does not certify the accuracy of
the updated information per 3a) or that the Registrar cannot verify that
the Registrant can be contacted using the updated information per 3b)
within a 30 day period from the start of the re-verification process,
the Registrar must either
        a) Place the registration in "ON_HOLD" status with the applicable
registry pending correction of the inaccuracy.
        b) Cancel the registration.
        
4) A Complainant may only file data accuracy complaints that can be
reasonably judged to be valid. In all cases, a registrar must verify the
validity of the complaint using the following methods;
        a) in the event that the complaint is filed regarding the accuracy of
whois data that can be verified using electronic means (i.e. an email
address), the Registrar must verify the validity of the complaint by
verifying the accuracy of the data.
        b) in the event that the complaint is filed regarding the accuracy of
whois data that is not verifiable using electronic means (i.e. a mailing
address), the complainant must be able to provide the basis for their
complaint (i.e. a letter returned by the postal service as
undeliverable) when requested by the Registrar required to perform the
verification.

Observations & Advisories for ICANN Staff and Board of Directors;

1) In order for these policies to be effective, it will be imperative
that they be communicated to the Internet community. ICANN staff should
endeavor to publicize these policies and ensure that the preferred
mechanism by which a complaint may be filed is made known to the
community. This may include press relations, prominent links on the
ICANN website and as appropriate, ICANN advisories targetted at
appropriate sectors of the community.

2) In order for these policies to be effective, they must be measured
and, as appropriate, modified to ensure their effectiveness. The Task
Force recommends that the implementation and execution of these
recommendations be monitored by the GNSO. Specifically that;

         a) ICANN Staff analyse and report to the GNSO Council at three,
six and twelve month intervals after implementation with the goal of
determining;

              i. How effectively and to what extent the policies have
been implemented and adopted by Registrars, Registries and Registrants,

              ii. Whether or not modifications to these policies should
be considered by the GNSO as a result of the experiences gained during
the implementation and monitoring stages,

              iii. The effectiveness of the dispute resolution processes
and a summary of the filings that have been resolved through the process.

         b) Pursuant to which, the GNSO Council may instruct the staff to;

              i. Continue bi-annual reviews in a manner consistent with
the aforementioned requirements, or;

              ii. Report again to the GNSO Council in an additional
twelve month time frame.

          c. The purpose of these monitoring and reporting requirements
are to allow the GNSO Council to determine when, if ever, these
recommendations and any ensuing policy require additional clarification
or attention based on the results of the reports prepared
by ICANN Staff.

Regards,

- --




                       -rwr



Tucows Start Service: http://start.tucows.com

My contact info: http://www.blogware.com/profiles/ross
My weblog: http://www.byte.org/

"I respect faith, but doubt is what gets you an education."
 - Wilson Mizner
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP)

iD8DBQFCd5jt6sL06XjirooRAiEJAJ9Vy0MNPGtW8+teciyw0DHLjJj1bwCeOVzC
cIHl5QPFCa68L6RH1mactOA=
=WSoW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Attachment: tf123-accuracy-recprop-2005-03-05.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: tf123-accuracy-recprop-2005-03-05.doc
Description: MS-Word document