RE: [gnso-trans-wg] Revised Document

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

As I shared in yesterday's call and previous calls, this issue has been one of 
the problem areas we experience in resolving transfer disputes. Because of 
that, I think we have it in the right group if we want it to be part of a PDP.
 
 I also shared in one of our earlier calls and in my comments added to Tom's 
suggested grouping document that it is not clear that there is an easy solution 
to this.  Because of that, I probably wouldn't fight too hard for deleting the 
recommendation, but my preference would be not to delete it.
 
Regarding the use of the word 'simultaneous', I was not on the Transfer Review 
WG so I cannot speak authoritatively in that regard, but it seems to me that 
this is just a case of imprecise wording.  It probably would have been better 
to refer to 'change of registrant shortly after a registrar transfer'.
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: Thomas Keller [mailto:tom@xxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 5:16 AM
        To: Gomes, Chuck; gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx
        Subject: AW: [gnso-trans-wg] Revised Document
        
        
        Hello,
         
        please excuse my tardiness but reading the latest document I have to 
bring up one more recommendation we should discuss. 
         
        9. m. Whether special provisions are needed for change of registrant 
simultaneous to transfer or within a period after transfer. The policy does not 
currently deal with change of registrant, which often figures in hijacking 
cases. (CT10.0)

         
        It should have come to my mind before but technically there is no such 
thing as a simultaneous change of registrant and registrar. The way the 
protocol works is that the transfer has always to be executed first before a 
change of registrant can be made. In fact the transfer itself has nothing to do 
with  any registrant data it is purely a change in sponsorship from one 
registrar to another. A change of registrant after the completion of a transfer 
is in no way related to the transfer policy but subject to the RRA requirement 
3.22:
         
        3.2.2 Within five (5) business days after receiving any updates from 
the Registered Name Holder to the data elements listed in Subsections 3.2.1.2, 
3.1.2.3, and 3.2.1.6 for any Registered Name Registrar sponsors, Registrar 
shall submit the updated data elements to, or shall place those elements in the 
Registry Database operated by the Registry Operator.
         
        As I agree that both issues can be related especially in the case of 
hijacking changes I do not view this as a transfer issue and would therefore 
suggest to swop it into the pool of deleted recommendations.
         
        Best,
         
        tom

________________________________

        Von: owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Gomes, Chuck
        Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. März 2008 00:31
        An: gnso-trans-wg@xxxxxxxxx
        Betreff: [gnso-trans-wg] Revised Document
        
        
        Here is the latest version of our PDP recommendations as promised.  
Note that the changes we agreed to in today's call are highlighted; please 
verify that I have captured them correctly and communicate any errors on this 
list ASAP so that I can prepare a clean document by Monday of next week.  Also 
note that there are two sections as follows that I added at the end of the 
document: 1) my summary of the discussion we had regarding ordering of the 
PDPs; 2) meeting details for next week that I repeat here: Wednesday, 12 March, 
16:00 UTC (09:00 PDT Los Angeles, 11:00 CDT Cedar Rapids, 17:00 CET Brussels).  
This is one hour later than today's meeting - note that those of us in the U.S. 
will be on daylight savings time and I think I properly reflected that in the 
times shown.
         
        Action Items for Next Week
         
        All:  review the attached document and communicate any corrections or 
suggested changes to this list NLT Sunday, 9 March
         
        Chuck:  prepare a clean version of the attached document with added 
text to create a draft version of our recommendations for the Council and 
distribute it ASAP before next week's call
         
        Olof:  prepare a draft version of text that will be integrated with 
Chuck's draft as part of the recommendations document to the Council (e.g., 
references to related documents, members of the WG, numbering scheme for 
recommendations and priorities, etc.)
         
        Agenda for Next Week

        1.      Finalize recommendations with regard to PDP order, priorities, 
etc. 
        2.      Review and edit draft documents distributed by Chuck & Olof 
        3.      Make plans for finalizing and sending our recommendations to 
the Council.

        Thanks for your cooperation,
         
        Chuck Gomes
         
        "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, 
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized 
use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the 
original transmission."