RE: [gnso-pednr-dt] Proposal regarding Guaranteed renewal period and blackout
- To: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>, MICHAEL YOUNG <myoung@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, PEDNR <gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-pednr-dt] Proposal regarding Guaranteed renewal period and blackout
- From: Oliver Hope <oliver.hope@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:32:51 +0000
I think Michael makes a very good point here. Registrars will be tempted to
darken all names after 2 days, because there may become a valid reason for them
to want to delete after 10 but they will always need the 8 days prior to be
dark. Therefore to be safe, best practice would become to darken everything
after 2 days to be on the safe side. I don't think this is the outcome anyone
I think I'm struggling a little to understand everything in the way you want it
to be understood (apologies), and I definitely need clarification on one point
- what if the name has never been used and is already dark? What are the
Sorry if I'm missing something and you've already explained this somewhere.
Finance & Operations Director
From: Alan Greenberg [mailto:alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 20 January 2011 23:57
To: MICHAEL YOUNG; Marika Konings; PEDNR
Subject: Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] Proposal regarding Guaranteed renewal period and
Michael, answers embedded.
At 20/01/2011 04:02 PM, MICHAEL YOUNG wrote:
>Ok thanks for the prompt reply Alan, so let me
>see if I understand this correctly with a little walk through here.
>One recommendation is to ensure the domain is
>retrievable by the registrant for 10 days after expiry.
For at least 10 days.
>Another recommendation is to ensure the that
>"if" the domain is darkened during the
>auto-renew grace period, it must be retrievable
>by the registrant for 8 days after darkening.
Although not critical here, note that the
proposal does not refer to the ARGP, but simply post-expiration.
>If I were a registrar then, and my practise was
>to "darken" the domain sometime after expiry but
>before deletion, then to comply with both of
>these recommendations I would have to "darken"
>the domain by the end of the second day
>following expiration, to darken it later would
>violate one of these recommendations.
No, to darken it later is fine. But that pushes
out the 10 day period. So if you choose to give
30 days of continued operation and then darken,
you cannot irrevocably sell the domain to someone else before day 38.
Perhaps in an effort to make it short, I lost clarity. Here is another version.
a) The domain must be guaranteed renewable for at least 10 days.
b) Before it can be lost (ie not renewable by the
RAE), it must be darkened for 8 days first.
c) Notwithstanding a) and b), the registrar can delete at any time.
The intent is to always give a registrant a
go-dark warning before the domain is no longer
renewable. The typical scenario today where the
registrar blackens the domain somewhere in the
first 5 days and allows the RAE to renew until
day 30-40 meets the requirements. As would
darkening on day 2 and irrevocably selling on day
11. And the registrar (one of those surveyed) who
darkens on day 21 and allows renewals until day 35.
The behavior that it does not allow is darkening
on day 11 and simultaneously making it no longer
renewable under the published terms.
Is that any better?
>Was that really the intention, to drive that
>type of behaviour? From the statistics I have
>seen, I am not seeing any obvious benefit that
>will assist a typical registrant by forcing
>darkening practises to be initiated the second day after expiration,...........
>Am I missing another element here?