[nc-transfer] reposting
Title: reposting -----Original Message-----
Marilyn, yesterday you asked me to provide a list of previously requested technical
The interim code of conduct is located at
a brief synopsis of my points in yesterdays call are attached. The requested technical fixes will come in another email. thanks, -rick I don't want to rehash or review the past 9 months of discussion nor do I wish to provide the TF with every detail discussed by the RC upto this point. What I want you all to understand is the following: Registrars have requested several technical fixes to the Registry to help reduce some of the pressures applied by registrars chasing expiring domains these technical fixes have not been addressed by the registry. Alternative proposals were made to the WLS but VeriSign would not discuss implementing any of these proposals the list of proposals and additional information is available at http://www.icann-registrars.org/deletes.htm The registrars have made their feelings on WLS extremely clear via individual postings, alternative proposals, and constituency wide votes. The registrars are firmly against the WLS as proposed by VeriSign registry. The registrars are also having issues with a WLS/VeriSign partner, SnapNames, in that SnapNames is performing extensive data mining attacks against some registrars and we feel these very unfriendly acts concern us to trust issues with the SnapeNames as a partner in the WLS service offering. The VGRS analysis presented VeriSign owned registrars as supporters and did not address the significant opposition from the other Registrars. VeriSign's NewMath(sm) paints a rosy picture to near complete opposition. VeriSign Registrar is part of the SRS loading problem as SnapNames manages the overflow pool transactions for SnapNames Platinum parters of which VeriSign is one. Registrars have taken under discussion a code of conduct that addresses some issues with deletes and transfers; the document has not been adopted the material can be reviewed at http://www.icann-registrars.org/html docs/CodeofConduct3.htm The WLS is purely for speculation -- we must acknowledge this fact, if we are going to build systems for speculation we should understand how the WLS will be used. If the WLS is a test we need to remove the compelling nature of the WLS for IPR interests as the WLS will compel them to purchase and will muddy the analysis. I propose that there be a method such as an RRP command, that could make it imposable to place a WLS onm a domain. This would allow registrants to choose of they wanted a WLS on their domains to be taken and also provide real numbers for demand for this "product" In short the WLS is a bad idea and a poorly designed product and the registrars need the registry to fix several technical issues not create new products to provide additional revenue for VeriSign. Its time for the NC and its task-forces to be a compass for DNS registrants, registrars and registries not weather vain that points to the direction of hottest and strongest wind. thank you. Rick Wesson CTO, ICANN/DNSO Registrars Constituency CEO, Alice's Registry, Inc. www.ar.com
|