Re: [gnso-irtp-b-jun09] Some IRTP-B "Loose Ends"

["Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

James

On 29 Apr 2011, at 21:29, James M. Bladel wrote:

> 
> Team:
> 
> As discussed during our last call, I'm concerned that the EAC issue had
> dominated our conversations, and as a result some topics were being
> overlooked in our recommendations.

Very true

> 
> One of these was the the 60-day lock following a previous transfer.  We
> noted that the problem of domain transfer 'hopping' between registrars
> was a known issue, and could be used to thwart anti-hijacking issues, as
> well as create other enforcement / takedown problems.  We noted that the
> 60-day post-transfer lock is optional (Reason for Denial #9), and that
> most large registrars followed this practice, but that it was not
> mandatory.  So, therefore, I think we have three options here:
> 
> (1) leave this topic untouched in our recommendations 
> (2) Create some language that indicates this is a voluntary best
> practice
> (3) Create some language for inclusion in the IRTP that makes this
> mandatory for all registrars.

Making it mandatory makes life simpler for everyone. It means that it is more 
"predictable", which is what a lot of people want. 
It also does away with certain loopholes that some people may wish to exploit.
It would also remove a customer service headache for those registrars who are 
exercising the "option"
> 
> 
> Having discussed this internally, I can report our preference would be
> for option #3.  I propose moving Reason for Denial #8 (60 days after
> creation) and #9 (60 days after transfer) out of the criteria for which
> registrars MAY deny a transfer, and creating a new section for these
> situations, under which registrars SHALL deny a transfer.  Thoughts?

Agreed

> 
> Additionally, when modifying the language for Reason for Denial 6, I
> want to ensure that this provides some degree of clarity for registrars
> and registrants, without prohibiting existing domain security products
> and services.  We can discuss on our call Tuesday, but I want to ensure
> that we do not confuse an issue by attempting to make the language
> clearer.

I think I agree. 
> 
> Finally, as noted during the call, we should add an "EAC Follow Up" task
> to a later IRTP working group (e.g. IRTP-E), to see how this program is
> progression and gauge its effectiveness.

Agreed

Regards

Michele


Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
ICANN Accredited Registrar
http://www.blacknight.com/
http://blog.blacknight.com/
http://blacknight.mobi/
http://mneylon.tel
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
US: 213-233-1612 
UK: 0844 484 9361
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845