Re: [nc-transfer] Registrar Impact Analysis for Final Report

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>]

Should they be enumerated? I thought it was reasonable to leave it to the
requirements that could be inferred from the statements like....

"This report contemplates many new and/or modified obligations..."

So therefore, the implication is that the impact would be limited to those
obligations that had changed or were new...

If the analysis isn't clear enough, let me know and I will re-put pen to
paper.


                       -rwr




"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
idiot."
- Steven Wright

Got Blog? http://www.byte.org/blog
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Steinberg" <synthesis@videotron.ca>
To: "Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>
Cc: <nc-transfer@dnso.org>
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 7:50 PM
Subject: Re: [nc-transfer] Registrar Impact Analysis for Final Report


> Ross,
>
> Ummmmmmmmm.....
>
> you stated in para. 1 that you 'attempted to restrict the analysis to
> items that may affect all registrars'. In the subsequent paras where do
> I find these items?
>
> Ross Wm. Rader wrote:
>
> >Folks,
> >
> >Please find to follow a brief analysis of the impact of these
> >recommendations on the registrar community. I have attempted to restrict
the
> >analysis to items that may affect all registrars rather than trying to
> >identify issues that may crop up on a limited basis.
> >
> >Comments and feedback welcomed;
> >
> >Registrars
> >This report contemplates many new and/or modified obligations that may or
> >may not be fully understood by ALL registrars. It will be important to
> >ensure that ICANN and the DNSO are prepared to undertake a level of
outreach
> >and education necessary to ensure that all ICANN Accredited Registrars
are
> >aware of and compliant with these new and modified obligations. Some of
the
> >new or modified obligations contained in this report are more stringent
than
> >prior policies have allowed. This will require Registrars to ensure that
> >their internal systems and processes are compliant with any policies
enacted
> >as a result of these recommendations.
> >
> >
> >
> >Some of the recommendations contained in this report will require
Registrars
> >to modify, to varying degrees, their internal technical systems in a
manner
> >that will support any policies enacted as a result of this report. While
the
> >degree of modification will vary from Registrar to Registrar, the Task
Force
> >does not believe the costs incurred as a result of these modifications
will
> >be substantial. Further, anecdotal evidence suggests that the long-term
> >benefits achieved through the implementation of standardized processes in
> >some areas of the transfer process will result in increased consumer
> >confidence and therefore outweigh any short-term costs involved.
> >
> >
> >
> >Further to this point, many registrars already employ systems which are,
or
> >could be with minimal enhancement, comply with the recommendations made
in
> >this proposal.
> >
> >Also, because there is no requirement that the processes implemented as a
> >result of any policy implemented as a result of these obligations be
> >technically automated. Therefore, Registrars maintain full control over
> >their cost structure in the face of these new and modified obligations.
> >
> >
> >
> >                       -rwr
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
> >idiot."
> >- Steven Wright
> >
> >Got Blog? http://www.byte.org/blog
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> 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
>
>
>