RE: [registrars] Xfer of SLD sponsorship/ EU Investigation/ Minutes of Teleconference (fwd)

[Len <len@isdi.com>]

Hi,
> > >=20
> > > Dear All,
> > >=20
> > > I agree with Ken here. As I tried to point out at the telephone=20
> > conference today there shouldn't be any particular technical=20
> > difference for the registry to change registrar in comparision to=20
> > changing DNS for a registered domain.
> > >=20
> > > Maybe I've missed the point somewhere but what is the actual=20
> > security issue about transferring a registered domain name to=20
> > another registrar? We will all have signed agreements that we=20
> > won't breach lightly. Isn't it much worse if domain contacts or=20
> > DNS is changed without authorization form the holder? Registrar=20
> > can easily be switched back while changing DNS can result in=20
> > denial of service or even worse hijacking of mail and other services.
> > >=20
> > > IMHO transfers should be handled in the same way as the other=20
> > data in the registry's and registrar's databases (exept from=20
> > certain owner data). This goes with the fees involved as well.=20
> > Otherwise it will certainly be an adequate competition advantage to =
> NSI.
> > >=20
I agree!  I tried to get this point over on the first conference call.  Neither
ICANN or Commerce seemed to "get it"...  From my point of view, there is the same
amount of verification involved as a DNS change...

Len Bayles
Project Manager All West Registry
All West Communications

> > > Regards,
> > >=20
> > > Per-Anders, Port Information System
> > >=20
> > > > i believe that there has to be some sort of documentation=20
> > requirement but
> > > > notarized statments are not practical in many countries and most=20
> > > > definitely
> > > > not a "global business practices".
> > >=20
> > > > documentation has to be considered in light of both economics=20
> > as well as
> > > > "universally accepted global business  practice".
> > > > some sort of a redundant "internet-based"  answerback e-mail=20
> > confirmation
> > > > would seem to be more appropriate to me
> > >=20
> > > > >There is a concern about the unauthorized transfer of domain=20
> > name.  It
> > > > >appears that NSI is claiming that it must safeguard against=20
> > unauthorized
> > > > >slamming.  Simple solution at least as I see it:
> > > > >
> > > > >(1) Establish guidelines similar to what NSI currently employs=20
> > > > with regard
> > > > >to name changes or domain xfers,i..e a signed notarized =
> statement.
> > > > >(2) NSI should make the change without investigation based upon=20
> > > > Registrars'
> > > > >representation
> > > > >(3) Registrar is required to keep documentation of=20
> > sponsorship transfer
> > > > >authorization
> > > > >(4) If a registrar transferred name in bad faith, i.e. no proper
> > > > >documentation, registrar should pay a penalty or face=20
> > de-accreditation in
> > > > >light of numerous bad faith transfers.
> > > > >
> > > > >This way registrars that act in good faith are not penalized and=20
> > > > those that
> > > > >don't pay the price. The only question is who collects the=20
> > penalty?  Some
> > > > >component should go to the registry to cover their=20
> > administrative costs,
> > > > >however, the majority of the penalty should go somewhere=20
> > else. Where I do
> > > > >not know?
> > >=20
> >=20
>