Deletes Implementation Report

6 May 2003

This document provides:

            An assessment of whether a recommendation is implementable

            Information on issues that will need to be considered during implementation

            Suggested text to clarify or improve the existing recommendations

Organization of the Analysis

The analysis is mostly contained in two tables.  In Table 1 contains an assessment of whether the Deletes Task Force recommendations that relate to Registrars or Registries are implementable, the relative cost of implementation, and the level of support from registrars.

Table 2 contains information on issues associated with the recommendations that will need to be considered during implementation, and also where appropriate additional or alternative text to strengthen or clarify the existing recommendation.

Table Abbreviations

Table Headings

#          The number of the recommendation

Cost     What is the cost impact if the recommendation is implemented? (high/medium/low/?)

Enf       Is the recommendation enforceable if it is implemented? (yes/no/?)

Feas     Can the recommendation reasonably be implemented from a process point of view? (yes/no/?)

Supp    What is the anticipated level of support for the recommendation from registrars? (high/medium/low/?)

Tech     Can the recommendation be reasonably implemented from a technical point of view? (yes/no/?)

Legend

N/A     Not applicable

TABLE 1
#	Deletes Task Force Recommendation	Cost	Enf	Feas	Tech	Supp
3.1.1	Domain names must be deleted if a paid renewal has not been received by the registrar from the registrant or someone acting on the registrant’s behalf by the end of the Auto-renew Grace Period (generally forty-five days after the domain’s initial expiration).  As a mechanism for enforcing this requirement, registries may elect to delete names for which an explicit renew command has not been received prior to the expiration of the grace period.	Low	Yes	No, needs to take into account extenuating circumstances, and that a registrant may not need to pay directly for the renewal.	Yes	N/A
3.1.2	Domain name must be deleted within 45 days of the expiration of the registration agreement between the registrar and the registrant, unless the agreement is renewed.	Low	Yes	No, needs to take into account extenuating circumstances, and that a registrant may not need to pay directly for the renewal.	Yes	N/A
3.1.3	These requirements retroactively apply to all existing domain name registrations beginning 180 days after the adoption of the policy.	Low	Yes	Yes	Yes	High
3.1.4	Registrars must provide a summary of their deletion policy, as well as an indication of any auto-renewal policy that they may have, at the time of registration.  This policy should include the expected time at which a non-renewed domain name would be deleted relative to the domain’s expiration date, or a date range not to exceed ten days in length.	Low	Yes	Yes	Yes	High
3.1.5	Registrars must provide their deletion and auto-renewal policies in a conspicuous place on their websites.	Low	Yes	No, some registrars may not operate a website.	Yes	N/A
3.1.6	Registrars should provide, both at the time of registration and in a conspicuous place on their website, the fee charged for the recovery of a domain name during the Redemption Grace Period.	Low	Yes	No, wording should allow for registrars without a website, and allow registrars not to charge a fee,	Yes	N/A
3.2.1	In the event that a domain the subject of a UDRP dispute is likely to expire during the course of the dispute, the dispute resolution provider will notify both the complainant and respondent of the impending expiration either at the time the dispute is filed, or no later than 30 days prior to the expiration of the domain.  In order to facilitate this process, registrars will provide the expiration date of the domain at the time it confirms the registration of the domain to the UDRP provider.	Low	Yes	Yes	Yes	High
3.2.2	In such an event, the complainant will have the option to pay for a one year renewal at the sponsoring registrar’s current prevailing rate for renewals.	High	Yes	Unnecessarily complex and therefore expensive.	Yes	N/A
3.2.3	In the event that the complainant paid the renewal fee prior to the domain name’s expiration, the original registrant will have up to thirty days after the end of the relevant registry’s auto-renew grace period in which to pay for the renewal of the domain name.  If neither complainant nor the original registrant pay for the renewal of domain name, it will be subject to deletion no later than the end of the auto-renew grace period.	High	Yes	Excessively complex	Yes	N/A
3.2.4	In the event that both the registrant and the complainant pay for the renewal, the name will be renewed on behalf of the original registrant in accordance with the registrar’s usual policy, and any renewal fee paid by the complainant will be refunded	High	Yes	Excessively complex	Yes	N/A
3.2.5	In the event that only the complainant pays for the renewal of the domain name, prior to the expiration of the auto-renew grace period the registrar will: - place the name on REGISTRAR HOLD and REGISTRAR LOCK, with the result that the name will no longer resolve in the DNS - modify the WHOIS entry for the domain name to indicate that the name is the subject of a UDRP dispute, and to remove all specific registration information the for the WHOIS record - if the complaint is terminated prior to a panel decision being rendered, but after the domain name reaches this state, the domain name will be deleted.	High	Yes	Excessively complex	Yes	N/A
3.2.6	Where only the complainant paid the renewal fee for a domain name the subject of a UDRP action and the complainant’s UDRP case fails, if the relevant registry’s normal renewal grace period has expired, the domain name will be deleted.	High	Yes	Excessively complex	Yes	N/A
3.2.7	In all other cases, the registrar shall comply with the outcome of the UDRP dispute in accordance with regular policies.	High	Yes	Excessively complex	Yes	N/A
3.3.1	The Redemption Grace Period will apply to names deleted due to a complaint on WHOIS accuracy.  However, prior to allowing the redemption in such a case, the registrar must update the registration with verified WHOIS data and provide a statement indicating that the data has been verified in conjunction with the request for the name’s redemption.  The same rules that apply to verification of WHOIS data for regular domain names following a complaint will apply to deleted names.	High		Should be considered as part of the review of the WHOIS Policy, after the WHOIS task force recommendations have been implemented..		N/A

Table 2  Detailed implementation analysis
#	Current recommendation with suggested enhancements	Comments and issues
3.1.1	Current recommendation: Domain names must be deleted if a paid renewal has not been received by the registrar from the registrant or someone acting on the registrant’s behalf by the end of the Auto-renew Grace Period (generally forty-five days after the domain’s initial expiration).  As a mechanism for enforcing this requirement, registries may elect to delete names for which an explicit renew command has not been received prior to the expiration of the grace period. Suggested replacement text: At the conclusion of the registration period, failure by or on behalf of the Registered Name Holder to consent that the registration be renewed within the time specified in a second notice or reminder shall, in the absence of extenuating circumstances, result in cancellation of the registration by the end of the auto-renew grace period (generally forty-five days after the domain’s initial expiration).  As a mechanism for enforcing this requirement, registries may elect to delete names for which an explicit renew command has not been received prior to the expiration of the grace period. Where a registrar chooses, under extenuating circumstances, to renew a domain name without the explicit consent of the registrant  (such as required by operation of the UDRP or other applicable dispute resolution policy in order to implement a court, arbitral tribunal or Administrative Panel decision, or to give time for DNS records to be migrated to a nameserver not associated with the expired domain name), the registrar must submit a “Registrar Renew Report” to ICANN concerning the circumstances that created the need to renew the Registered Name. (One report may be submitted for multiple renewed Registered Names, as long as the facts requiring the “Registrar Renew” are similar.)	In its current form, the recommendation requires the registrar to delete names absolutely, not allowing exceptions for various extenuating circumstances under which deleting registrations by that deadline could harm innocent registrants or result in a loss of DNS nameservice for other domains. To take into account various registrar business models, it is also not appropriate to require that a registrar receive payment for a renewal service. Note Clause 3.7.5 of the current registrars accreditation agreement states “Registrar shall register Registered Names to Registered Name Holders only for fixed periods. At the conclusion of the registration period, failure by or on behalf of the Registered Name Holder to pay a renewal fee within the time specified in a second notice or reminder shall, in the absence of extenuating circumstances, result in cancellation of the registration. In the event that ICANN adopts a specification or policy concerning procedures for handling expiration of registrations, Registrar shall abide by that specification or policy." Consistent with the Redemption Grace Period proposal, to ensure transparency and monitoring of compliance, a registrar should submit a “Registrar Renew Report” to ICANN for names that are renewed without the explicit consent of the registrant, or the registrant’s agent on behalf of the registrant, under the extenuating circumstances provision.  The report could be in a similar format to that used for the redemption grace period restore operation. It would also be appropriate to list examples of extenuating circumstances, such as related to UDRP disputes.
3.1.2	Existing Recommendation: Domain name must be deleted within 45 days of the expiration of the registration agreement between the registrar and the registrant, unless the agreement is renewed. Suggested Replacement text: In the absence of extenuating circumstances, a domain name must be deleted within 45 days of the expiration of the registration agreement between the registrar and the registrant, unless the agreement is renewed.	Providing a uniform time frame for when a domain name that has expired will be deleted is useful, but it also needs to accommodate extenuating circumstances such as described above.
3.1.3	Existing Recommendation: These requirements retroactively apply to all existing domain name registrations beginning 180 days after the adoption of the policy.	This seems OK.  It provides 6 months to fully implement the recommendation.
3.1.4	Existing Recommendation: Registrars must provide a summary of their deletion policy, as well as an indication of any auto-renewal policy that they may have, at the time of registration.  This policy should include the expected time at which a non-renewed domain name would be deleted relative to the domain’s expiration date, or a date range not to exceed ten days in length. Suggested replacement text: Registrars must make readily available their deletion policy, as well as an indication of any auto-renewal policy that they may have, at the time of registration and during the registration period.  This policy should include the expected time at which a non-renewed domain name would be deleted relative to the domain’s expiration date, or a date range not to exceed ten days in length. A registrar must use best endeavours to inform a registrant of any material changes to the deletion policy during the period of the domain name licence.	There is a concern this recommendation only refers to the time of registration, even though the policies and prices may not come into effect until after the registration expires.  It is not clear whether registrars would be able to modify their procedures or prices at any time after initial registration of a domain name. Thus the recommendation should allow for the registrar to make the information available at any time, and also require the registrar to advise the registrant of any material changes to the policy that occur during the registration period.
3.1.5	Current recommendation: Registrars must provide their deletion and auto-renewal policies in a conspicuous place on their websites. Suggested replacement text: If a registrar operates a website for domain name registration or maintenance, a registrar must provide their deletion and auto-renewal policies in a conspicuous place on the website.	This recommendation requires that a registrar has a website.  It would be appropriate to make this relate to a registrar “if” they operate a website.
3.1.6	Current recommendation: Registrars should provide, both at the time of registration and in a conspicuous place on their website, the fee charged for the recovery of a domain name during the Redemption Grace Period. Suggested replacement text: If a Registrar operates a website for domain name registration or maintenance, they should provide, both at the time of registration and in a conspicuous place on their website, any fee charged for the recovery of a domain name during the Redemption Grace Period.	As above.  Also this recommendation assumes that the registrar is charging a fee for recovering a domain name during the redemption grace period.  More flexible wording would be appropriate.
3.2.1	In the event that a domain the subject of a UDRP dispute is likely to expire during the course of the dispute, the dispute resolution provider will notify both the complainant and respondent of the impending expiration either at the time the dispute is filed, or no later than 30 days prior to the expiration of the domain.  In order to facilitate this process, registrars will provide the expiration date of the domain at the time it confirms the registration of the domain to the UDRP provider. Recommend delete.	The recommendations seem to be overly complex and proscriptive.  For example, some registrars simply renew a name as an extenuating circumstance while a dispute is under way.  Once the dispute is resolved, the registrar may charge the resulting domain name holder for a renewal.  If payment is not provided the registrar may choose to delete the name.  The price of renewal of a name is generally far smaller than the cost of the dispute process. The recommendations could be expensive for a registrar to implement in terms of providing a specialized business process for an event that may not occur very often.  It is often cheaper for a registrar to simple absorb the registry cost of renewal, than the costs of implementing a complex billing process incorporating refunds.  A better solution would be to allow the recommendations regarding to deleting domain names above to accommodate extenuating circumstances.  UDRP can be explicitly references as an extenuating circumstance.  The registrar would be free to use their own business processes to handle fees and charges associated with these extenuating circumstances. Thus it is recommended that recommendations in section 3.2 be treated as an extenuating circumstance of recommendation set 3.1.
3.2.2	In such an event, the complainant will have the option to pay for a one year renewal at the sponsoring registrar’s current prevailing rate for renewals. Recommend delete.	See comments for 3.2.1.
3.2.3	In the event that the complainant paid the renewal fee prior to the domain name’s expiration, the original registrant will have up to thirty days after the end of the relevant registry’s auto-renew grace period in which to pay for the renewal of the domain name.  If neither complainant nor the original registrant pay for the renewal of domain name, it will be subject to deletion no later than the end of the auto-renew grace period. Recommend delete.	See comments for 3.2.1.
3.2.4	In the event that both the registrant and the complainant pay for the renewal, the name will be renewed on behalf of the original registrant in accordance with the registrar’s usually policy, and any renewal fee paid by the complainant will be refunded. Recommend delete.	See comments for 3.2.1.
3.2.5	In the event that only the complainant pays for the renewal of the domain name, prior to the expiration of the auto-renew grace period the registrar will: - place the name on REGISTRAR HOLD and REGISTRAR LOCK, with the result that the name will no longer resolve in the DNS - modify the WHOIS entry for the domain name to indicate that the name is the subject of a UDRP dispute, and to remove all specific registration information the for the WHOIS record - if the complaint is terminated prior to a panel decision being rendered, but after the domain name reaches this state, the domain name will be deleted. Recommend delete.	See comments for 3.2.1.
3.2.6	Where only the complainant paid the renewal fee for a domain name the subject of a UDRP action and the complainant’s UDRP case fails., if the relevant registry’s normal renewal grace period has expired, the domain name will be deleted. Recommend delete.	See comments for 3.2.1.
3.2.7	In all other cases, the registrar shall comply with the outcome of the UDRP dispute in accordance with its regular policies. Probably no longer required.	OK, but probably unnecessary if delete recommendations 3.2.1 to 3.2.6
3.3.1	The Redemption Grace Period will apply to names deleted due to a complaint on WHOIS accuracy.  However, prior to allowing the redemption in such a case, the registrar must update the registration with verified WHOIS data and provide a statement indicating that the data has been verified in conjunction with the request for the name’s redemption.  The same rules that apply to verification of WHOIS data for regular domain names following a complaint will apply to deleted names. Recommend hold this recommendation until after the recent WHOIS changes have been implemented and their effect reviewed.	This recommendation relates to the impact of the redemption grace period on domain names that are deleted following a complaint regarding WHOIS accuracy.  The WHOIS task force has recently had a recommendation approved by the ICANN Board relating to the interaction between the redemption grace period and the deletion of the name for inaccurate WHOIS information. The WHOIS task force recommended: “When registrations are deleted on the basis of submission of false contact data or non-response to registrar inquiries, the redemption grace period – once implemented – should be applied.  However, the redeemed domain name should be placed in registrar hold status until the registrant has provided updated WHOIS information to the registrar-of-record.” It is recommended that the community first gain experience with the new WHOIS accuracy recommendations, and consider further enhancement of these recommendations at the time of reviewing the impact of the changes on WHOIS accuracy.