Comments on `` F. EPP AuthInfo''
First it should be acknowledged that the EPP authorization code, just by itself, is *not* a solution to transfer problems, specially wrongful nack. Also, currently, this code is not used as it was envisioned when the protocol was designed: at that time, it was believed that the registrant will choose this code and memorize it (alongside many others), but in fact very few registrars let a registrar choose this code at registration or modify it later on. So, transfers can still be a problem with EPP because this code is mandatory for the gaining registrar to be able to launch the process with the registry, but the loosing registrar may well make sure that the registrant has many hops to travel before getting access to this code. Like written for the E. part, the policy should clearly tell what happens if a registrar does not give this code or create hurdles (like asking for notarized documents and such). Also, the registry could be involved, and I belive some other thick registries are doing so. Thick registries do know the email of the admin/contact. They could, upon request through a publicly available website, sent the authorization information to those email adresses. As written for the A part, at the protocol level it was thought that just the possession of this authorization information is enough to start a transfer. So, the authorization email may be an extra step conflicting with this idea. -- Patrick Mevzek . . . . . . Dot and Co (Paris, France) <http://www.dotandco.net/> <http://www.dotandco.com/>