Comments on `` F. EPP AuthInfo''

[Patrick Mevzek <contact@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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/>