[ga] FYI: WLS Vote of Transfers Task Force
From: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@aim.be>
>In preparation for the NC discussion and vote on the final report of the Transfers task force on the Wait List Service referral, please see below the result of the internal vote of the task force on their report. (Edits for clarity are mine.)
>Philip.
>
>----------------------------------
>I. Recommendation 1: To deny the WLS:
>
>A. RGP The ICANN board move with all haste to implement and actively enforce the
>proposed Redemptions Grace Period for Deleted Names policy and practice
>Yes: ccTLD, ISPCP, GA, NonC, IP, gTLD, Registrars, BC
>Accepted by all
>
>B. WLS and agreement. The ICANN Board reject Verisign's request to amend its agreement to
>enable it to introduce its proposed WLS.
>Yes: ccTLD, ISPCP, GA, NonC, Registrars, BC
>No: IP, gTLD
>6 YES 2 NO
>
>C. WLS trial. The ICANN Board reject Verisign's request to trial the WLS for 12 months.
>Yes: ccTLd, ISPCP, GA, Registrars, BC
>No: gTLD
>Abstain: NonC, IP
>5 YES 1 NO 2 ABSTENTIONS
>
>I. Summary Recommendation to deny the WLS:
>Yes: ccTLD, ISPCP, GA, NonC, Registrars, BC
>No: IP, gTLD
>6 YES 2 NO
>
>II. Contingency recommendations in event the Board rejects the TF prime recommendation.
>Should the ICANN board not accept the policy recommendations noted above
>and grant Verisign's request for a change to its agreement and a 12 month
>trial of its WLS, we would alternatively recommend that WLS be approved with
>conditions:
>
>A. RGP. The introduction of WLS is dependent on the implementation and proven
>(for not less than six months) practice envisaged in the proposed
>Redemption Grace Period for Deleted Names policy and practice and the
>establishment of a standard deletion practise.
>Yes:ccTLD, ISPCP, GA, NonC, IP, Registrars, BC
>No:gTLD
>7 YES 1 NO
>
>B. Deletions. Several Constituencies remain concerned that a standard deletion practise
>be established and implemented. Some TF members believe that this could be
>considered separately from WLS.
>
>(CHOICE OF ONE OF THREE):
>
>1) Standard Deletion practise should be established at same time as WLS and
>implemented before WLS.
>Yes: ccTLD, ISPCP, GA, Registrars, BC
>5 YES
>2) Standard deletion practise should be established, but need not be in
>place before
>WLS is implemented.
>Yes: IP, NonC
>2 YES
>
>3) Standard deletion practise should be considered separately.
>Yes: gTLD
>1 YES
>C. Information/notice. (CHOICE OF ONE OF TWO).
>
>C. 1. The WLS include a requirement that notice be provided by the Registry
>(through the registrar) to the existing registrant of a domain name when a
>WLS option is taken out against that registrant's domain name.
>Yes: GA, NonC,
>2 YES
>
>C. 2. Information should be available to the incumbent domain
>name holder when a WLS has been put on the name.
>Yes: ccTLD, ISPCP, IP, BC, .Registrars
>Abstain: gTLD,
>5 YES 1 Abstain
>
>D. Transparency. The WLS include a requirement for full transparency as to who has placed
>a WLS option on a domain name and the registrar that actions the option.
>Yes: ccTLD, ISPCP, GA, NonC, Registrars, BC
>No: IP
>Abstain: gTLD
>6 YES 1 NO 1 Abstain
>
>E. Cost. WLS should be cost based, consistent with previous considerations for
>approval of Registry services by the ICANN Board.
>Yes: ccTLD, ISPCP, GA, , Registrars, BC
>Abstain: IP, gTLD, NonC
>5 YES 3 Abstain
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
|