ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-pednr-dt]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [gnso-pednr-dt] Another try at a middle ground

  • To: Berry Cobb <berrycobb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'PEDNR'" <gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-pednr-dt] Another try at a middle ground
  • From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 14:06:02 -0500

Currently, if a domain expired and the registrar has existing permission to reassign (and most do), the after any reassignment, the entity that it is reassigned to now effectively does the renewal. So the domain never reached the end of the 45 day ARGP and is not required to be deleted.

At 01/02/2011 01:48 PM, Berry Cobb wrote:
Michael,

Did you mean ?only the RAE??


For at least 8 concurrent days, at some point following expiration, the original DNS resolution path of the RAE, at the time of expiration, must be interrupted, and the domain must be renewable <<only>> by the RAE until the end of that period.
This 8-day period may occur at any time following expiration.

Notwithstanding, the registrar may <<must>> delete the domain at any time during the Auto-renew grace period.

WRT to this last ?Notwithstanding,?.? Statement, if I am making the correct connection, directly maps to RAA 3.7.5.3 of the current EDDP. If this is true, then your statement would read ??..a domain name must be deleted within 45 days of the registrar or the registrant terminating a registration agreement.?

To remain on this topic and perhaps this becomes a learning opportunity for me, 3.7.5.3 in its present form confuses me when I try to understand the EDDP process today. When I key of the phrase, ??must be deleted within 45 days?.,? how is it with today?s expiration processes that not all expired domains become deleted by the registrar? Or am I mistaken and all expired domains are in fact deleted and therefore traverse RGP? If the latter is true, then if all expired domains ?are? deleted and thus enter RGP. Isn?t this the essence of the ?adequate opportunity to recover the domain?? from our charter question? Isn?t this the very reasoning why the former chair of the GNSO council and co-developer of RGP many years ago has publicly stated that RGP should probably be consensus policy? I welcome anyone to correct my logic offline and simply want to make sure I have a full understanding for this WG?s closure.

Berry Cobb
Infinity Portals LLC
berrycobb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://infinityportals.com
720.839.5735

From: owner-gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Young
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 10:22 AM
To: PEDNR
Subject: [gnso-pednr-dt] Another try at a middle ground

Hi all,

Below is a recommendation crafted out as a ?suggested? middle ground and it is intended to replace both the guaranteed recovery period proposal suggested by James and Alan?s proposal are darkening the domain.

In this version, there is not a complete darkening of the domain, but the DNS resolution path is expected to be interrupted (redirection). Where the guaranteed recovery period occurs during the 45 day grace period is now at the discretion of the Registrar ? this should minimize (or hopefully eliminate) impact to existing business models. If this doesn?t get the attention of a registrant that has gone awol, then I really don?t know what cost effective/reasonable measure could.

This also allows Registrars to charge a premium for renewals after expiry but prior to RGP, but as I read the rest of the recommendations, that knowledge would be made explicitly available to the registrant prior to expiration.

New Recommendation:

For at least 8 concurrent days, at some point following expiration, the original DNS resolution path of the RAE, at the time of expiration, must be interrupted, and the domain must be renewable by the RAE until the end of that period.
This 8-day period may occur at any time following expiration.

Notwithstanding, the registrar may delete the domain at any time during the Auto-renew grace period.



Is this something that might work for both sides here?



Best Regards,

Michael Young
Vice President, Product Development
Afilias
O:416-673-4109
M:+1-647-289-1220



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy