RE: [registrars] Deletes Task Force Initial Report

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@godaddy.com>]

I believe I will withdraw my request for a vote on this report for now.
The Task Force has already been back at it, and we have agreed to
mention the two additional issues that are noted in the ballot below.
However, they will not be added as formal recommendations from the Task
Force. I believe this is a reasonable approach.

The final report is close to completion and may be ready to post by the
time we get this vote completed. So I think at this point it would be
best to hold off and vote on the final report instead.

Thanks,
Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@godaddy.com] 
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2003 10:48 AM
To: 'Tim Ruiz'; 'GNSO Registrars'
Subject: RE: [registrars] Deletes Task Force Initial Report

I have let this set due to the recent votes. There have been no other
amendments to this ballot put forward. I would now like to call for a
vote on the ballot below.

Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org] On
Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:11 AM
To: ross@tucows.com; 'GNSO Registrars'
Subject: RE: [registrars] Deletes Task Force Intial Report

The amendment proposed by Ross has been incorporated into the ballot
below.

Discussion of the ballot should conclude on Sunday at 3:00PM EST. Voting
should open no later than Tuesday and close after 48 hours. Rick, if I
can assist in setting this up please let me know.

<ballot>

The GNSO Council's Deletes Task Force has issued its initial report.
This report addresses issues related to registrar and registry deletion
practices and makes three recommendations. The result of this vote will
be the basis for building an official constituency position statement in
response to the report.

Two additional recommendations related to the Deletes Task Force work
have been proposed based on discussions at the recent joint
Registrar-Registry Constituency meeting held in Washington DC.

Recommendation to modify the registry auto-renew process:

On the day of expiration the domain enters the auto-renew grace period
(currently 45 days). The expiration date is NOT advanced. The registrar
is NOT charged.

On the last day of the auto-renew grace period, if the domain has not
been explicitly deleted or explicitly renewed, the expiration date is
advanced one year and the registrar is charged for the renewal.

Recommendation to reinstate the 5-day pending grace period:

Domains deleted at any time other than during the Add Grace Period enter
a 5-day pending delete grace period after which the domain is then
placed in the Redemption Grace Period.


[] I support the recommendations in the Deletes Task Force report;

[] I support the recommendations in the Deletes Task Force report with
the additional recommendations;

[] I cannot support the recommendations in the Deletes Task Force
report;

[] Abstain.

</ballot>

Tim


-----Original Message-----
From: Ross Wm. Rader [mailto:ross@tucows.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 10:45 AM
To: 'Tim Ruiz'; 'GNSO Registrars'
Subject: RE: [registrars] Deletes Task Force Intial Report

Tucows happily seconds this motion and offers a friendly amendment that
the text of the ballot includes the substance of the proposal set forth
in DC rather than a reference to it.

We also propose that discussion on this ballot closes by the end of this
week (Sunday?) given the substantial discussion that we have already
devoted to the subject both on this list and in DC.



                       -rwr




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

Get Blog... http://www.byte.org/


 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org 
> [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 3:52 PM
> To: 'GNSO Registrars'
> Subject: RE: [registrars] Deletes Task Force Intial Report
> 
> 
> I formally move that we vote on the Deletes Task Force report 
> using the following ballot:
> 
> The GNSO Council's Deletes Task Force has issued its initial 
> report. This report addresses issues related to registrar and 
> registry deletion practices and makes three recommendations. 
> The result of this vote will be the basis for building an 
> official constituency position statement in response to the report.
> 
> [] I support the recommendations in the Deletes Task Force 
> report; [] I support the recommendations in the Deletes Task 
> Force report with the addition of recommendations to modify 
> the registry auto-renew process and to reinstate the 5-day 
> grace period after deletion of a domain name and prior to it 
> entering the Redemption Grace Period, both as discussed at 
> the recent joint Registrar-Registry Constituency meeting held 
> in Washington DC; [] I cannot support the recommendations in 
> the Deletes Task Force report; [] Abstain.
> 
> A supporting document will be listed under Referenced Items, 
> and will read as follows:
> 
> Modified registry auto-renew process:
> 
> On the day of expiration the domain enters the auto-renew 
> grace period (currently 45 days). The expiration date is NOT 
> advanced. The registrar is NOT charged.
> 
> On the last day of the auto-renew grace period, if the domain 
> has not been explicitly deleted or explicitly renewed, the 
> expiration date is advanced one year and the registrar is 
> charged for the renewal.
> 
> Reinstating the 5-day pending grace period:
> 
> Domains deleted at any time other than during the Add Grace 
> Period enter a 5-day pending delete grace period (currently 
> missing) after which the domain is then placed in the 
> Redemption Grace Period.
> 
> Discussion? Second?
> 
> Tim
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org 
> [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org] On Behalf > Of Tim Ruiz
> 
> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 6:17 PM
> To: GNSO Registrars
> Subject: RE: [registrars] Deletes Task Force Intial Report
> 
> The public comment period for the initial report closes on 
> March 3rd. We briefly discussed the report at the RC meeting 
> in DC, which resulted in the raising of a related but 
> separate issue. There have been no other comments from 
> registrars regarding the initial report.
> 
> I would like to request at this time that we proceed with a 
> vote on the Deletes TF Initial Report, after which we will 
> work on producing a position statement in response to the report.
> 
> Rick, will you need a formal motion and second to get this started?
> 
> Thanks,
> Tim
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 6:48 AM
> To: registrars@dnso.org
> Subject: [registrars] Deletes Task Force Intial Report
> 
> 
> I failed to notify the list that the Deletes Task Force 
> Initial Report has been posted and is open for public comment 
> until March 3, 2003.
> 
> The report is posted at: 
> http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20030211.Delete>
sTF-initial-report.html
> 
> Comments should be submitted to:
> comments-deletes@dnso.org
> 
> The comment archive is available at: 
> http://www.dnso.org/dnso/dnsocomments/comments> -deletes/Arc02/
> 
> Tim
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>