RE: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] Updated recommendations overview

["James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Marika and IRTP-B Team:

Thanks for putting together this list.  Here are a few comments /
observations:


Rec #3:
  Since our report already notes that the "Thick" model is required for
New gTLDs, this recommendation only applies to COM/NET, correct?  If so,
we should explicitly state this.
  Also, I have trouble categorizing this Recommendation as "Unanimous"
as at least half the group had some hesitation about agreeing.  Would
prefer "Strong Support."


Rec #4:  
  After some internal discussions, I would now favor Simonetta's
proposal to refer this to a specialized group.  We have acknowledged a
missing function ("Change of Control"), which is essential to (and
distinct from) traditional IRTP functions, and would prefer not to see
this group try to tackle this by San Francisco.


Rec #6:
  I spoke with our URDP team regarding this, and they acknowledge that
there are issues / differences of interpretation on how transfer
requests are handled w.r.t. UDRP. But the issue is in the language of
the UDRP, not the IRTP.  Specifically, they point out that some
registrars implement UDRP Sec. 8 differently, specifically 8(b) which
says that we must obtain written confirmation from the "Gaining"
registrar that the proceeding will continue after the transfer.  Our
team notes that this is extraordinarily rare.


Rec #7:  
  We should be careful not to include in our Recommendations any
comments or speculation about what effect a policy will have on Registry
or Registrar prices.  While this may in fact be the case, including it
in the recommendations could create issues / resistance at the next
level (Council).


Rec #8:  
  In this Recommendation we should clarify whether Registries blocking
transfer requests on EPP-locked names is a "policy" or "protocol /
practice."  If Registries are doing this at their own discretion, then
we shouldn't assume this will always be the case.  If we can find the
policy provisions that support this, we should cite them.  If none
exist, we should recommend one.



Look forward to discussing these today.  Thanks!

J.



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] Updated recommendations overview
From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, January 10, 2011 3:28 am
To: "Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx" <Gnso-irtp-b-jun09@xxxxxxxxx>

Dear All,


Please find attached the updated recommendations overview which
incorporates the changes discussed at last week's meeting and
suggestions posted on the mailing list.


With best regards,


Marika