[gnso-irtpc] FW: [ccTLDcommunity] Request for information by GNSO WG on Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy
Dear All, Please find below the feedback received from AFNIC (.fr, .re, .yt, .tf, .pm and.wf) in response to the WG's request for input. With best regards, Marika From: Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill@xxxxxxxx<mailto:mathieu.weill@xxxxxxxx>> Reply-To: "Mathieu.Weill@xxxxxxxx<mailto:Mathieu.Weill@xxxxxxxx>" <Mathieu.Weill@xxxxxxxx<mailto:Mathieu.Weill@xxxxxxxx>> Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 09:00:27 -0800 To: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:bart.boswinkel@xxxxxxxxx>>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>> Cc: Emilie Turbat <Emilie.Turbat@xxxxxxxx<mailto:Emilie.Turbat@xxxxxxxx>>, Isabel Toutaud <Isabel.Toutaud@xxxxxx<mailto:Isabel.Toutaud@xxxxxx>> Subject: Re: [ccTLDcommunity] Request for information by GNSO WG on Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy Dear Bart, dear Marika, In response to your request, please find enclosed the details about the Inter-Registrar transfer procedures we run at AFNIC, and which are applied to .fr, .re, .yt, .tf, .pm and .wf (note that this is an extract of our registrar procedure guide). In addition, I should add that we receive a negligible amount of complaints about this procedure, and that the number of abusive requests is probably less than 5 a year, out of 2,2 million names managed. I am available if need be for further explanations on the procedures. Best Mathieu Le 10/01/2012 11:20, Bart Boswinkel a écrit : Dear all, The ccNSO has received a request from the GNSO Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part C Working Group to provide input and feed-back on the experiences of ccTLD’s with a procedure or process for a ‘change of control’ as described in the GNSO IRTP Final Issue Report (see included input template for the description), in addition to the ccTLDs described in the Issue Report (.EU, .IE, and .UK). Furthermore, the WG would be interested to receive feedback on the experiences with other ccTLD procedures or processes for a ‘change of control’ as well as identifying potential benefits and/or possible negative consequences from applying similar approaches in a gTLD context. Included is a template that has been created by the GNSO WG to assist the GNSO Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups with producing their comments, with a request to use it. The template was created specifically for the GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies, it is hoped that it might also be useful in any comments you might decide to submit. If you should you decide to submit your comments in a different way that would be welcome too. To be most helpful you are requested to send your responses by 24 January 2012 to my colleague Marika Konings or me directly. Marika is a member of the ICANN GNSO support staff. Thank you and kind regards, Bart Background The GNSO Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part C Policy Development Process has begun and the Working Group formed to do the work is requesting input from the ccTLD community or individual ccTLD’s to help inform its deliberations. As required by the ICANN Bylaws an ICANN Public Comment period <http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/irtp-c-charter-21nov11-en.htm <http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/irtp-c-charter-21nov11-en.htm><http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/irtp-c-charter-21nov11-en.htm> > is currently open until 22 December. As recommended by the new GNSO Policy Development Process which was adopted by the ICANN Board on 8 December, the WG is making direct outreach to several Advisory Committees and to the ccNSO. The IRTP Part C Working Group has been charged with responding to three charter issues: * "Change of Control" function, including an investigation of how this function is currently achieved, if there are any applicable models in the country-code name space that can be used as a best practice for the gTLD space, and any associated security concerns. It should also include a review of locking procedures, as described in Reasons for Denial #8 and #9, with an aim to balance legitimate transfer activity and security. * Whether provisions on time-limiting Form Of Authorization (FOA)s should be implemented to avoid fraudulent transfers out. For example, if a Gaining Registrar sends and receives an FOA back from a transfer contact, but the name is locked, the registrar may hold the FOA pending adjustment to the domain name status, during which time the registrant or other registration information may have changed. * Whether the process could be streamlined by a requirement that registries use IANA IDs for registrars rather than proprietary IDs. Finally, the GNSO IRTP WG membership would also like you to know that the IRTP Part C WG is open to participation by members of the ICANN Community either as representatives of a group, such as an AC or SO, or as individuals participating in their own capacity. _______________________________________________ ccTLDcommunity mailing list ccTLDcommunity@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ccTLDcommunity@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>http://www.lists.cctld-managers.org/mailman/listinfo/cctldcommunity To unsubscribe please send a blank email to ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ccTLDcommunity-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- ***************************** Mathieu WEILL AFNIC - directeur général ***************************** Attachment:
procedures-manual-fr-transfer.doc |