[Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt] Proposal for the Transition of Existing Registrations from Thin to Thick

[gtheo]

I like to keep things simple, so option two is the path forward in my 
opinion.

However, let's assume only a few IRT members reply by Friday, does that 
automatically mean that option two is the path forward?

Thanks,

Theo Geurts | Compliance & Policy Officer

Realtime Register B.V.

Ceintuurbaan 32A
8024 AA - ZWOLLE - The Netherlands

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





Fabien Betremieux schreef op 2016-04-05 12:48 AM:
> Dear IRT members,
> 
> In our recent conference call, the IRT discussed the transition of
> existing registration from thin to thick. It is our understanding that
> two alternative approaches are emerging:
> 
> Option 1 - The registries impose some checks on the registration data
> before it can be accepted
> 
> 	* The initial proposal from the registries for such checks is based
> on EPP Standards (RFC 5733), with subsequent discussion of potential
> changes to such checks.
> 	* The main drawback of this approach is that the transition would
> likely to last a considerable amount of time due to:
> 
> 	* The need for registrars to process a very significant amount of
> data (collectively) to ensure it would pass the registries' checks
> 	* The need for Staff and the IRT to gather findings from data
> analysis by registrars before they can define a realistic
> implementation timeline, which in itself would delay the definition of
> the implementation plan
> 
> Option 2 - The registries do not impose any checks on the registration
> data during the transition
> 
> 	* This is a proposal emerging from recent discussions, considering
> that the Policy Recommendation does not include data accuracy
> requirements and therefore is out of scope for this implementation
> 	* The benefit of this approach is that it Is in scope with the policy
> recommendations, it reduces the implementation to a sizable bulk
> transfer of data, and it creates an opportunity to possibly
> synchronize the transition of new and existing registrations by
> defining a single cut-off date after which all registrations are
> thick.
> 
> Considering the outcome of the IRT's meeting with the RrSG in
> Marrakech, and considering recent community comments on the time it is
> taking to implement the transition from thin to thick, we would like
> to propose that the IRT move forward with Option 2 as we believe it is
> the most applicable path forward.
> 
> We would like to gather IRT members thoughts on our proposal to move
> forward with Option 2. Your input would be appreciated by Friday 8
> April COB at the latest, for discussion during our next IRT meeting,
> which we are planning to organize the following week.
> 
> Thank you in advance for your consideration
> 
> Best Regards
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt mailing list
> Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt