RE: [gnso-stability-thickwhois] Escrow & Stability

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Jeff. I am in the process of composing a message with just this thrust.

Alan

At 28/01/2013 07:16 PM, Neuman, Jeff wrote:
> I would like to understand a little bit more about the so-called 
> risks.  .biz and .info have been thick for over a decade without any 
> incident from an escrow or stability standpoint.  .org has been 
> thick for about 8 or 9 years with no incident.  .us and a number of 
> other cctlds have been thick for quite some time...again no 
> incident. We need to engage a little more in some fact based 
> decision making and not cater to the philosophical fears that have 
> never arisen.
> Best regards, Jeffrey J. Neuman Sent from iPad.  Please excuse any typos.
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From:   Alan Greenberg [mailto:alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent:   Monday, January 28, 2013 06:44 PM Eastern Standard Time
> To:     gnso-stability-thickwhois@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject:        Re: [gnso-stability-thickwhois] Escrow & Stability
>
> I am at a bit of a loss as to how we are going to proceed.
>
> On the questions of benefits of having two repositories and two
> escrows, all parties agree that it would be good, but NCUC, NPOC and
> Verisign feel that there are risks or problems associated with both
> registrars and registries housing data that outweigh the benefits.
> NPOC's position is that if things are run well, extra copies are not
> needed. It is not clear how to ensure that things are run well.
>
> On the question of whether registrar escrow is needed IF we have all
> thick registries, all parties that answered think that registrar
> escrow should be kept, but some of the answers seem to imply "we
> don't want thick so therefore registrar escrow still needed".
>
> I am attaching an extract of the comment template for our questions
> with my short-hand summaries in column D. Feel free to add your own.
>
> Alan
>
> At 15/01/2013 09:56 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
>
> >I am afraid that I have had to focus on other issues until now, but
> >given that stakeholder input is just now arriving, this is probably
> >a good time to start work in earnest.
> >
> >The members of this sub-group are:
> >.        Alan Greenberg (ALAC)
> >.        Carolyn Hoover (RySG)
> >.        Tim Ruiz (RrSG)
> >.        Jeff Neuman (RySG)
> >.        Christopher E George (IPC)
> >.        Frederic Guillemaut (RrSG)
> >
> >As I understand it, we are looking at two issues:
> >
> >- Stability, with a focus on the implications and requirements of
> >having multiple repositories of Whois data.
> >- Data Escrow document what is done and investigate if any changes
> >are required or recommended.
> >
> >I suggest the following for our work-plan:
> >
> >1. Discussion and enhancement (if applicable) of topics to be
> >addressed - on list.
> >2. Individual review of stakeholder input.
> >3. Schedule a call to to discuss issues.
> >4. Draft summary/report
> >
> >Comments?
> >
> >Alan