[Gnso-dmpm-wg] - IRTP Review Use Case With Executive Summary

[gtheo]

Some observations as an individual registrar.

We track incoming transfers and outgoing transfers but i would not be 
able to use those numbers to come up with a percentage that would 
indicate that an IRTP PDP is succesfull or not.


If i would look at support requests where our resellers would ask why a 
transfer has not been executed (in or out transfers), i would then be 
able to come up with significant number that would show a drastic drop 
in those support requests and could contribute it to IRTP-B.

Also to keep in mind, that if you would look at IRTP that it is very 
possible that the RAA 2013 with it's verification and validation might 
distort the statistics.

Just a few observations from my side.

Best regards,

Theo Geurts


Realtime Register B.V.

Ceintuurbaan 32A
8024 AA - ZWOLLE - The Netherlands

T: +31.384530759
F: +31.384524734
U: www.realtimeregister.com
E: support at realtimeregister.com





Andrew Merriam schreef op 2014-11-12 23:13:
> Thanks, Steve. I just want to note that the IRTP example relies
> heavily on registrar reporting. Not being a registrar, I don't know
> how much of this information is actually currently tracked or will be
> tracked under the new IRTP. That would be helpful context and I'd
> certainly look to those closer to the registrar end of things to
> provide an assessment what fulfillment of such a request would entail.
> 
> 
> As far as Registry concerns, we outsource most of our technical and
> database requirements, as most new TLD registries do. I am not aware
> that our use of any reporting function comes at a higher cost but that
> could be a concern for some folks. I don't think there is anything to
> be done with this on either side but am merely brainstorming how
> fulfillment of such a request would work..
> 
> Thanks
> 
> A
> 
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Steve Chan <steve.chan at icann.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> Dear WG Members,
>> 
>> Staff has prepared a draft executive summary that has been attached
>> to the IRTP use case discussed in last week’s call. As a reminder,
>> the WG will be meeting next week on 18 November at 21:00 UTC and I
>> would like to strongly urge discussion on the email list regarding
>> this draft in advance of that meeting to ensure that progress is
>> made.
>> 
>> In addition, as the scope of data/metrics requests for policy making
>> extends beyond just the registries and registrars (including this
>> IRTP Review use case), the WG may want to consider distributing this
>> use case more broadly, perhaps to all stakeholder groups and
>> constituencies. I would encourage discussion on this point as well.
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> STEVEN CHAN
>> Sr. Policy Manager
>> 
>> ICANN
>> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
>> 
>> Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
>> steve.chan at icann.org
>> 
>> direct: +1.310.301.3886 [1]
>> mobile: +1.310.339.4410 [2]
>> 
>> tel: +1.310.301.5800 [3]
>> 
>> fax: +1.310.823.8649 [4]
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-dmpm-wg mailing list
>> Gnso-dmpm-wg at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-dmpm-wg [5]
> 
> --
> 
> Andrew Merriam
> Business Development Coordinator
> 
> Top Level Design, LLC
> tldesign.co [6]
> 
> 505.238.9166
> @AndMerriam
> skype: andrewpmerriam
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1] tel:%2B1.310.301.3886
> [2] tel:%2B1.310.339.4410
> [3] tel:%2B1.310.301.5800
> [4] tel:%2B1.310.823.8649
> [5] https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-dmpm-wg
> [6] http://tldesign.co
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-dmpm-wg mailing list
> Gnso-dmpm-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-dmpm-wg