Re: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] action item from the last call -- defining consequences
- To: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] action item from the last call -- defining consequences
- From: "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 18:09:46 +0000
Thanks for your efforts with all this - it is appreciated :)
On 24 Apr 2011, at 18:10, Mike O'Connor wrote:
> hi all,
> i'm chipping away at a new draft of the EAC stuff (and an FAQ to go with it)
> and came to the point in our phone discussion where we were working on what
> the consequences would be when a response is not received in the required
> we have one very clear consequence -- the transfer-undo. but during our
> discussion we contemplated a broader range of consequences and escalation, as
> per the request made by the Registries in their comments.
> it was late in the call and we decided to punt that question to the list. so
> here we are.
> anybody got any thoughts on this topic? i'm fine just leaving the
> consequence at the transfer-undo.
A key thing is to try and keep it very simple, but obviously if the registrar
is repeatedly unresponsive there should be consequences.
Reporting them to ICANN compliance?
To the best of my knowledge there is no "channel" for contracted parties to
report issues to ICANN / compliance beyond either using the public "issue
report" form or emailing them directly. The problem with both methods is that
there is no transparency in terms of "tracking" ie. you submit and then it goes
into a black hole
Mr Michele Neylon
Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
ICANN Accredited Registrar
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
UK: 0844 484 9361
Locall: 1850 929 929
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845