[Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt] Open Item 7b - Coordination/Incentive for Registrars Migration to Thick
theo geurts
gtheo at xs4all.nl
Tue Aug 16 20:29:50 UTC 2016
So I joined this IRT, I guess December last year.
I agree this one has/is taken a long time for reasons I do not know. I
was not part of the WG, so I do not carry much history.
The last few months we made a lot of progress I think. We set a time
line based on several factors and I happen to think I been driving and
pushing this one with several other Registrars.
Amount of connections, speed of connections, size of Registrar, that not
every Registrar is aware and a ton of other reasons, including
Registrars to do their own legal analysis to see if they can migrate the
data.
I understand as Steve rightfully pointed out, that this one took way to
long. My first thought is how can we prevent this in the future.
What I do not understand is why we want to speed things up. With so many
delays we are facing new realities. I think Steve DelBianco made some
good pointers during the Helsinki meeting. Personally I feel like I am
dealing with some old decision made in 2012 and now it is 2016 and we
are facing issues and the IRT can clean it up.
Wich is okay, and it is not that the system is broken or anything, but
what do we gain from speeding things up, it is like I am missing
something here? Why do we want to shower Registrars with money who
migrate the first week? What do we gain as a community?
Thanks
Theo Geurts
On 16-8-2016 20:35, Susan Kawaguchi wrote:
> I agree with Steve that we should look at incentives to move the
> transition of domain name registrations to the Thick Whois. And I
> agree that relying on compliance to enforce after 18 months is not
> acceptable due to the compliance team’s collaborative actions with
> registrars, simple issues take much longer than they need to take,
> this could push the timeline much farther down the road.
>
> What if ICANN stepped forward and offered a monetary incentive to move
> the registrations to Thick Whois within a much shorter time frame? A
> small reduction in fees for example.
>
> I am sure there are other positive incentives that we could come up
> with but if not transparency is always valuable to the ICANN community
> as a whole.
> Susan Kawaguchi
> Domain Name Manager
> Facebook Legal Dept.
>
>
> From: <gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of
> Steven Metalitz <met at msk.com <mailto:met at msk.com>>
> Date: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 at 11:24 AM
> To: 'Jody Kolker' <jkolker at godaddy.com <mailto:jkolker at godaddy.com>>,
> Rob Golding <rob.golding at astutium.com
> <mailto:rob.golding at astutium.com>>, "gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org>"
> <gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt] Open Item 7b -
> Coordination/Incentive for Registrars Migration to Thick
>
> Let’s remember why we are having this conversation.
>
> Thick Whois is a consensus policy. And the registrars, through this
> implementation process, are giving themselves eighteen months (from
> the date the registry production system opens – a year from now) to
> achieve compliance with that policy. I agree that at that point
> (February 2019 under the current timetable), failure to provide the
> required data to the registry will be a matter of contract compliance
> under the RAA (though I would contest that it becomes “public at that
> point”).
>
> The question we are discussing is whether there are any incentives
> that can be created so that registrars will provide the required data
> to the registry within a period of less than 18 months. Incentives
> can be positive or negative. Making public the extent to which each
> registrar is providing the required data on existing registrations, at
> some point during the 18-month period, certainly could provide some
> incentive. The reaction below (and others on this thread) demonstrate
> pretty clearly that a registrar would not wish to appear on a public
> list that shows a relatively low percentage of registrations for which
> the data has been provided to the registry. I would call that an
> incentive for the registrar to move faster toward full achievement of
> thick Whois than it might otherwise do. That is how a negative
> incentive works --- if you don’t do X, then you suffer some
> detriment. In this case that detriment takes the form, to use Rob’s
> term, of “naming and shaming.” It does not take the form of contract
> compliance action, because that does not apply until the 18 months
> have elapsed.
>
> I agree it may be of no immediate value to the registrar to have this
> information made public. Value to the registrar is not what we are
> talking about here. We are talking about whether making this
> information public will give registrars an incentive to come into
> compliance faster than they are required to do (under the deadline
> they have set for themselves through this group). Accelerated
> compliance would benefit the credibility of ICANN and of the
> multi-stakeholder model, both of which are losing credibility the
> longer this implementation process drags on. It could benefit
> competition, which is another way of saying it could benefit those
> registrars who move relatively faster toward thick Whois. It would
> benefit transparency. And it would benefit the public (ultimately it
> was the benefit to the public that motivated ICANN to adopt this
> consensus policy in the first place). But no, it would not benefit
> the registrar that is simply aiming for compliance at the end of 18
> months.
>
> What I am drawing from this thread is that the registrars in this
> group do not want to see any incentives provided for them to do their
> jobs faster than the 18 months they have decided on as the deadline
> for doing the job. This is disappointing but certainly not
> surprising. It is a perfectly legitimate position for registrars to
> take based on their own self-interest, but it gives short shrift to
> the other interests noted above, including competition, transparency,
> and the credibility of the multi-stakeholder model.
>
> I would certainly welcome any other suggestions for incentives –
> positive or negative – to encourage registrars to complete their role
> in achieving thick Whois in less than 18 months.
>
> Steve Metalitz
>
> **
>
> *From:*gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces at icann.org>
> [mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Jody
> Kolker
> *Sent:* Friday, August 12, 2016 6:51 AM
> *To:* Rob Golding; gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt] Open Item 7b -
> Coordination/Incentive for Registrars Migration to Thick
>
> +1.
>
> Thanks,
> Jody Kolker
> 319-294-3933 (office)
> 319-329-9805 (mobile) Please contact my direct supervisor Charles
> Beadnall (cbeadnall at godaddy.com <mailto:cbeadnall at godaddy.com>) with
> any feedback.
>
> This email message and any attachments hereto is intended for use only
> by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain confidential
> information. If you have received this email in error, please
> immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and
> any copy of this message and its attachments.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces at icann.org>
> [mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Rob
> Golding
> Sent: Friday, August 12, 2016 5:22 AM
> To: gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org
> <mailto:gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt] Open Item 7b -
> Coordination/Incentive for Registrars Migration to Thick
>
> Hi
>
> I cannot see a single valid reason why any form of unnecessary "naming
> and shaming" relating to a work-in-progress could benefit anyone -
> verisign producing a X% completed report is fine, but no details need
> to be "public" relating to any individual registrar.
>
> If the deadlines are not met, that'll be a compliance issue, and
> public at that point
>
> If the deadline has not yet been reached, there is no benefit to
> providing fuel for a fire that din't need to be lit and serves no
> useful purpose
>
> The Registrant (ultimately the only party that matters) isn't asking
> for this policy, isn't (obviously) benefited by the policy, and
> publicising sensitive corporate data about their chosen registrar
> could well be seen as doing demnstrable harm
>
> Rob
> --
> Rob Golding rob.golding at astutium.com <mailto:rob.golding at astutium.com>
> Astutium Ltd, Number One Poultry, London. EC2R 8JR
>
> * domains * hosting * vps * servers * cloud * backups *
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt mailing list
> Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org
> <mailto:Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_gnso-2Dimpl-2Dthickwhois-2Drt&d=DQMF-g&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=gvEx8xF7ynrYQ7wShqEr-w&m=-USHOFzkn_GygoRPoPSoTapiWOHSoOMj4og5OViLRtY&s=Ok10sW4YZh3-Hb9Rp3Pe4yskamjBOP8LWvUEOC9VyLI&e=>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt mailing list
> Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org
> <mailto:Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_gnso-2Dimpl-2Dthickwhois-2Drt&d=DQMF-g&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=gvEx8xF7ynrYQ7wShqEr-w&m=-USHOFzkn_GygoRPoPSoTapiWOHSoOMj4og5OViLRtY&s=Ok10sW4YZh3-Hb9Rp3Pe4yskamjBOP8LWvUEOC9VyLI&e=>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt mailing list
> Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt/attachments/20160816/a78d0f0f/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gnso-impl-thickwhois-rt
mailing list