Re: [ga] Domain Transfers

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

Danny Here is a comment on it;

DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

> Tucows has prepared a formal response to the 11/29 VeriSign letter on
> transfers.  This document and others are cited at:
> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/registrars/Arc01/msg01647.html
>
> Perhaps those seeking to represent the GA on the transfers TF would care to
> comment on this document.

These are the August comments regarding this matter by Louis Touton.  Herein
lies the problem.

I would like at this time to ask anyone to step forward and speak of any DN
Holder who has been upset with their ISP for switching from on Registrar to
another.  I think we have transferred thousands and the only time we have
received a complaint is when there was a problem coming from a Registrar
bothering the Holder.

I just have a problem envisioning a Holder objecting to the transfer, that
their ISP desires.

(do not mistake a complaint that is caused by the Registrar due to a request
for transfer)

Eric

 http://www.icann.org/correspondence/touton-to-russo-27aug01.htm

From the language of the policy, it seems apparent that:

         1. The responsibility for ensuring that a Registered Name Holder
authorizes the transfer lies with the gaining registrar, not the losing
registrar.

         2. This allocation of responsibility should not prevent the losing
registrar, as an additional measure, from seeking to inform Registered Name
Holders of impending transfers and affording them an opportunity to express
their objection.

         3. The allocation of responsibility does indicate, however, that the
losing registrar may not deny a transfer request that the gaining registrar has
verified merely because the losing registrar has not verified it. Thus, a
losing registrar should not deny a transfer request simply because it has
notified the Registered Name Holder of the request and has not received a
response.

         4. The losing registrar may, however, deny the transfer request where
it has an adequate reason for believing that the Registered Name Holder has not
authorized the transfer. In some instances, the failure of the Registered Name
Holder to respond to a notification may form one element of the reason. Because
the policy allocates the verification responsibility to the gaining registrar,
however, the lack of such a response is not by itself an adequate reason to
deny the transfer. Additional elements of an adequate reason may include
information relating to the Registered Name Holder (such as prior
communications) or the authorization practices followed by the gaining
registrar.



--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html