[nc-deletes] Revised draft recommendations

["Jordyn A. Buchanan" <jordyn.buchanan@Registrypro.com>]

Hi all:

There have been some slight revisions to the UDRP recommendations, to
clarify the policies a little bit and to clarify the intent of the policy,
so I wanted to re-send this unified set of recommendations.

I'm also hoping to send out a more fully developed draft report by tomorrow.

Thanks,

Jordyn


Issue 1: As indicated in the issues paper, the status quo presents an
environment in which users may not always understand the deletion process
applied to their domain name.  While recognizing the need for registrars to
pursue their own business models, the task force recommends that certain
baseline policies be adopted by all registrars.  Specifically:

1.  Domain names must be deleted if a paid renewal has not been processed by
the end of the auto-renew grace period (generally forty-five days after the
domain's initial expiration).  As a mechanism for enforcing this
requirement, registries may elect to delete names for which an explicit
renew command has not been received prior to the expiration of the grace
period.

2.  Registrars should provide a summary of their deletion policy, as well as
an indication of any auto-renewal policy that they may have, at the time of
registration.

3.  Registrars should provide their deletion and auto-renewal policies in a
conspicuous place on their websites.

<<<<<Under discussion:  whether or not registrars should be required to not
delete a name for a portion of the grace period.>>>>>

A special case exists for names that expire during the course of a UDRP
dispute.  In order to prevent the name from lapsing and being re-allocated
during the dispute, the task force proposes that the challenger in the UDRP
dispute be provided with the option of paying for the renewal of the domain
name in the event that the current registrant elects not to renew the domain
name.  The policy is described in more detail as follows:

1. In the event that a name under UDRP dispute is to expire, the sponsoring
registrar must notify the challenger of such expiration at least thirty days
prior to the name's deletion.

2. In such an event, the challenger will have the option to pay for a one
year renewal at the domain's renewal at the registrar's current prevailing
rate for renewals.

3. The original registrant will have the option of paying for the domain
name at any time up to the relevant registry's renewal grace period PLUS
thirty days (which matches the redemption grace period), regardless of
whether or not the challenger has paid for the domain's renewal.

3a. In the event that both the registrant and the challenger pay for the
renewal, the name will be renewed on behalf of the original registrant in
accordance with the registrar's usual policy, and any fee paid by the
challenger will be refunded.  The order in which the payments are received
shall not effect this provision.

4. In the event that only the challenger pays for the renewal of the domain
name, beginning no later than the duration of the relevant registry's
renewal grace period after the domain's expiration, the registar will:

4a. Place the name on REGISTRAR HOLD, with the result that the name will no
longer resolve in the DNS.

4b. Modify the Whois entry for the domain name to indicate that the name is
the subject to a UDRP dispute, and to remove all specific ownership
information for the Whois record.

4c. If the challenge is terminated prior to a verdict being rendered, but
after the domain reaches this state, the domain will be deleted.

5. In the event that the verdict of the UDRP challenge is that the domain is
to be transferred to the challenger, the registrar shall transfer the name
in accordance with its regular process for such situations.

6. Notwithstanding #3 above, if the verdict of the UDRP challenge is that
the domain is to be deleted, the registrar shall delete the name in
accordance with the usual UDRP process.

7. In the event that the verdict of the UDRP challenge is that the existing
registration be sustained, AND the relevant registry's renewal grace period
has expired without the original registrant paying for a renewal, the domain
name will be deleted.

7a. In the event that the verdict of the UDRP challenge is that the existing
registration be sustained, and the renewal grace period has not expired, the
domain name will be subject to the registrar's usual renewal and deletion
processes.

8. Provisions #6, #7 and #7a apply regardless of any payment for renewal by
the challenger.  With the exception of provision #3a above, the challenger
will not receive a refund for any renewal fees paid to the registrar.


Issue 2: Many of the problems raised within the issues paper are already
under consideration by the Whois task force.  In order to avoid overlap
between the two task forces, the Deletes Task force determined that:

1. The scope of the Whois Task Force is to determine under what
circumstances a domain name should be deleted for reasons relating to the
domain's Whois data.

2. The scope of the Deletes Task Force is to determine what happens to a
domain name once it has been deleted for reasons relating to the domains'
Whois data.

In most respects, a name deleted for reasons relating to inaccuracy of Whois
data is treated identically to a name deleted for any other reason.
However, it is important to prevent registrants from using the Redemption
Grace Period to simply re-instate names once they have been deleted, without
providing accurate Whois information.  In order to prevent this, the task
force recommends that registrars require that registrants of such names
provide new, verified Whois information.  This new data should be provided
as part of the documentation to the registry in conjunction with the request
for the name's redemption.



Issue 3: The task force believes that the recently adopted Redemption Grace
Period not only provides registrants with crucial protection in the event of
inadvertent deletion or misunderstanding of deletion policy, but also
provides significant transparency into the deletion process as lists of
names to be purged from the registry's system are published on a regular
basis.  The task force feels that the Redemption Grace Period provides an
adequate level of consistency and transparency in terms of registry deletion
policy, and does not recommend any other specific steps be adopted at this
time.

<<<<<Under discussion: whether any recommendations should be made with
regards to re-allocation.>>>>>



Issue 4: The task force has found that this issue is primarily technical in
nature.  Although both the RRP and EPP protocols lack an "undo" function
that would allow for the direct reversal of a renewal without deleting these
domains, registries generally have administrative procedures in place that
allow for such transactions to be reversed out-of-band.  As a result, the
task force sees no need to take action on this issue.

In the event that registries or registrars desire this capability to be
added to the EPP protocol, the task force believes that these changes are
best pursued through technical fora such as the IETF.