[gnso-irtpc] Data Gathering Subgroup Survey Results

[Bob Mountain <bmountain@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Everyone,
Please find attached the results from the survey on charter questions B and C.  
The data gathering sub team met yesterday and below are some observations that 
we made.

Would welcome input from the working group.  If you could get any comments to 
me by Friday of this week we will publish a findings paper the following week.

Thanks all for your support.
Mtn.



  *   Respondents seemed fairly balanced between large and small registrars.  
The number of registries seemed appropriate. We will attempt to subsegment the 
responses to further analyze the registrars but at a high level it seems 
balanced.
  *   Charter Question B:  The majority of respondents felt FOAs should be time 
limited, but a disproportionate share of comments felt the other way.
  *   Most respondents felt the FOA time limit should be 30 days or less.
  *   Almost half of the registrars responding already time limit FOAs on their 
own.
  *   A very small percentage of respondents have experienced problems due to 
FOAs not being time limited.
  *   An even small percentage had heard about problems caused by FOAs being 
not time limited.
  *   When asked about the downside of time-limited FOAs, a significant concern 
was the complexity involved in adding this  logic.  However it was raised that 
the standardized change in control may address this.
  *   Most (73%) respondents felt that time limited the FOA would involve 
minimal to some effort (as opposed to sizable effort)
  *   Charter Question C:  Most respondents (82%) had not experienced nor were 
aware of problems caused by the use of proprietary IDs versus IANA IDs.
  *   Many comments in favor of using IANA IDs were around simplicity and 
transparency.
  *   The responses on whether to require the use of only IANA IDs was pretty 
much split between yes, no, and no strong view either way.
  *   Most respondents did not believe use of IANA IDs only would involve 
significant effort.
  *   A majority (60%) felt there should not be a requirement to use IANA IDs 
combined with proprietary IDs however the subgroup mentioned the possibility of 
grandfathering existing proprietary IDs and moving forward with new IDs all 
being IANA.
  *   Most respondents (80%) felt the effort would not be sizable but we may do 
some sub segmentation on this to clarify based on respondent type.
  *   Implications of making a change to IANA IDs seemed heavily concerned with 
lack of support from ccTLDs.

--
Bob Mountain
Senior Vice President
Business Development
[cid:9F696FD4-E9C1-427D-B0C8-E6F83C4FFF89]
E: mtn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:bmountain@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
P: +1 781.839.2871    F: +1 781.839.2801  C: +1 508-878-0469

Visit us at NameMedia.com<http://www.namemedia.com/>

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any documents attached to it may 
contain confidential or proprietary information or content. The transmission is 
intended solely for the information or use of the individuals addressed, or 
copied, as intended recipients. If you are not a named recipient, or you were 
otherwise sent this by mistake, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, 
copying, distribution or taking of any action as a result of or in reliance on 
the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If this message has been 
received in error, please delete it immediately and notify the sender by return 
e-mail. Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

Attachment: Results IRTP Part C Data Gathering Survey - Final - 23 April 2012.pdf
Description: Results IRTP Part C Data Gathering Survey - Final - 23 April 2012.pdf