Re: [nc-transfer] Modifications per call notes

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

>
>   2.. That Registries SHOULD implement a "Transfer Undo" command that will
assist
> Registrants and Registrars in resetting a domain name back to its original
> state in the event that a transfer has occurred in contravention of the
> recommendations of this document.[WE DIDN'T DISCUSS HOW TO PAY FOR THIS
"RESETTING". SINCE THIS TRANSFER IS ASSUMED TO BE 1) ERROR--ACCIDENTAL/BUT
MISTAKEN 2) FRAUD 3)UNAUTHORIZED
> --MAY HAVE MISSED SOMETHING...]SHOULD WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT- OR ASSUME THAT
IT IS COVERED?

My impression was that this would be dealt with through the cost-recovery
provisions/capabilities set forth in the various contracts. Drop me a note
if I missed the boat...

>
>   3.. That these policy recommendations be revisited by the DNSO three,
six,
> twelve and twenty-four months after implementation to determine; [I WOULD
REWORD THIS TO SAY THAT THERE SHOULD BE A REPORT BY STAFF TO THE NC AT
THREE, SIX, AND 12 MONTH TIME FRAMES. BASED ON THAT FEEDBACK, THE NC MAY
INSTRUCT STAFF TO CONTINUE BI-ANNUAL REVIEWS, OR MAY INSTRUCT STAFF TO
REPORT AGAIN IN A SECOND 12 MONTH PERIOD. THE PURPOSE OF THESE REPORTS IS
THE NC/IT'S REPLACEMENT CAN DETERMINE WHETHER TO REVISIT THE
RECOMMENDATIONS.
>

That was certainly the intent. Let me reword.

>
>     1.. How effectively and to what extent the policies have been
> implemented and adopted by Registrars, Registries and Registrants.
>
>
>     2.. Whether or not modifications to these policies should be
considered
> by the DNSO as a result of the experiences gained during the
implementation
> and monitoring stages.
>
> WHERE IS 3.?

Oops....three is to the effect of "Analyse and report a summary of the
disputes filed to date including any observations that the community may
have concerning the process."

-rwr