RE: [nc-transfer] RE: For tomorrow's presentation on WLS -- revised recommendations based on Public Forum

["Russo, Christine" <crusso@verisign.com>]

In answer to the questions raised on yesterday's call regarding the proposed
Interim Redemption Period, please note the following which I have confirmed
with Chuck.

The concept of the Interim Redemption Period was developed in response to
the strong community concern / need for the Redemption Grace Period (RGP) in
conjunction with the WLS, weighed against the probable long lead time needed
to implement the "official" (for lack of a better term) RGP. The proposed
interim process will be a manual one, such process having been studied with
the appropriate registry personnel and validated as a realistic approach to
the desired result.  While differing from the "official" RGP in that it is
manual, the results of the interim plan would be functionally equivalent.
Lastly, please note that the Interim Redemption Period would apply ONLY to
names having WLS subscriptions and not to other deleted names.

I think this addresses the questions raised, but please let me know if there
are others and I will make sure they are addressed.  Thanks.

Christine   

-----Original Message-----
From: Cade,Marilyn S - LGA [mailto:mcade@att.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 4:20 PM
To: Dan Steinberg
Cc: Transfer TF (E-mail)
Subject: RE: [nc-transfer] RE: For tomorrow's presentation on WLS --
revised recommendations based on Public Forum


We can make that change... I also owe all an update from today... IF I can
figure it out myself. Have to debrief with Louie on a couple of the items
when I accidentally dropped off for a  few minutes. 

Please note that I have deleted non TF members from this response.  Marilyn
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Steinberg [mailto:synthesis@videotron.ca]
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 9:20 AM
To: Cade,Marilyn S - LGA
Cc: Transfer TF (E-mail); Ross Rader (E-mail); Mike Palage (E-mail); Tim
Denton (E-mail); Bruce Tonkin (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [nc-transfer] RE: For tomorrow's presentation on WLS --
revised recommendations based on Public Forum


Marilyn,

Might I make one minor change?
"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:"

"Cade,Marilyn S - LGA" wrote:
> 
> okay, foiled by spell check: in subject line:  revised recommendation
based on Public Forum
> The posting is the revised submission from the TF on the recommendations
section of our report.
> 
> Marilyn
> >  -----Original Message-----
> > From:         Cade,Marilyn S - LGA
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 11:43 PM
> > To:   Transfer TF (E-mail); Ross Rader (E-mail); Mike Palage (E-mail);
Tim Denton (E-mail); Bruce Tonkin (E-mail)
> > Subject:      For tomorrow's presentation on WLS -- revised
recommendations based no Public Forum
> >
> > Recommendations
> > *     The following policy recommendations are provided to the Names
Council  for adoption and forwarding to the ICANN Board.
> >
> > *     The ICANN Board move with all haste to implement and actively
enforce the proposed Redemptions Grace Period for Deleted Names policy and
practice
> > *     The ICANN Board rejects Verisign's request to amend its agreement
to enable it to introduce its proposed WLS.
> > *     The ICANN Board rejects Verisign's request to trial the WLS for 12
months.
> > Recommendations  - alternate
> > *     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 further recommend that:
> >
> > *     The introduction of the WLS be dependent on the implementation and
proven (for not less than 3 months) practice envisaged in the proposed
Redemptions Grace Period for Deleted Names policy and practice and the
establishment of a standard deletion period.
> > *     [Verisign has proposd an interim Grace Period. The TF questioned
whether the characteristics would be the same as the "ICANN Redempton grace
period" and indicated their support for the latter. There was no support
detected for a process which differed from the ICCAN Redemption process. The
TF is open to hearing more from Verisign on the characteristics of the
"interim Redemptions proposal.  Christine Russo agreed to pursue such
information.
> > *     Several of the Constituencies remain concerned that a standard
deletion period be established and implemented. This could be considered
separately from WLS. The TF will seek comment on this.
> > *     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.
> > *     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.
> > *     Based on the above two  points (notice and transparency), the
price for the WLS be set at the same amount as the current registry fee for
a registration - the cost of the WLS function being no more, and probably
less than a registration -- plus any additional costs to 'notice and
transparency' based on Verisign's provision of validating information to the
Board/staff.
> >
> >

-- 
Dan Steinberg

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin		phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec		fax:   (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1                 e-mail:synthesis@videotron.ca