RE: [gnso-pednr-dt] Updated version of PEDNR Final Report posted

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

The "If more than two..." sentence adds a few things:

- it makes it clear that were are not restricting 
registrars to just two messages;
- the "comparable" might give just a bit of 
wriggle-room on the timing if there are multiple 
messages sent. Although it would be up to 
compliance to judge, perhaps a message at day 11 
and another at day 3 would be deemed "comparable" to one at day 7±3.
Originally there was an exception policy proposed 
which would allow registrars to substitute other 
timing that would still meet the "give the 
registrant fair notice" requirement but would fit 
other business models, but the registrars on the 
WG (supported by others) felt that it was not 
necessary and would unnecessarily make things 
more complex and possibly confusing to registrants.
Alan


At 13/06/2011 01:43 PM, Tim Ruiz wrote:
> One other question/suggestion, sorry to bring it up so late but it
> didn't strike me until now, perhaps due to changes.
>
> Rec. 7 requires two notices to be sure some notice is given at
> reasonable times. Fine, but why the need to require similar timing if
> more than two are sent? It seems unnecessary and possibly even too
> restrictive. There are more types of registrants and business models
> than we can shake a stick at. It just may be that some other timing or
> frequency makes sense and gets better results. So require the two as
> stated, but drop the "if more than two" requirement. It isn't really
> necessary, IMHO.
>
>
> Tim
>
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: [gnso-pednr-dt] Updated version of PEDNR Final Report posted
> > From: Marika Konings
> > Date: Mon, June 13, 2011 6:00 am
> > To: "gnso-pednr-dt@xxxxxxxxx"
> >
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Please find attached an updated version of 
> the PEDNR Final Report posted on the wiki 
> (https://community.icann.org/display/gnsopednr/2.+WG+Documents+%28Drafts+-+Published%29) 
> that incorporates the edits suggested by Alan 
> (see 
> http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-pednr-dt/msg00839.html) 
> as well as the attendance information. If no 
> further minor edits / typos are submitted 
> today, this version will be submitted to the GNSO Council tomorrow, 14 June.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Marika
> >
> >