[Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Question

[Kathy Kleiman]

Griffin,
Quick question - if there is a bounceback indicating non-receipt where 
in fact it is really delayed receipt, how could and would that be 
processed by the sender?
Best,
Kathy
:
> Volker and all,
>
> Just a few thoughts on this subject--
>
> The re-verification process is supposed to take place within 15 days 
> under the 2013 RAA (3.7.7.2), but assuming for whatever reason the P/P 
> provider is not also the registrar for the domain name, it may take 
> longer than that to notify the registrar and then re-verify the 
> customer/registrant contact info (I suppose it might also take less 
> time, depending on the process and the responsiveness of the 
> customer).  But potentially, it could take a fairly long time to 
> re-verify. During this time, the original complainant who has 
> submitted a communication to be relayed to the P/P customer would 
> simply not know whether its communication was (a) received by the P/P 
> provider itself (although that part would probably be presumed) or (b) 
> forwarded successfully (i.e. without an "undeliverable" notice) to the 
> P/P customer.
>
> Informing the complainant of a bounce-back would be a simple mechanism 
> for preventing redundant follow-up submissions by the same complainant 
> trying to reach the same customer.  In other words, if the P/P 
> provider informed the complainant of abounce-back (perhaps in 
> conjunction with initiating its own next step in the required 
> re-verification process), this would preventthe complainant from 
> sending, and the P/P provider from receiving, unnecessary/futile 
> follow-ups in the intervening re-verification period.
>
> Then, once re-verified, the P/P provider could just relay the single 
> original communication.  Overall, it would seem to 
> me thatone simple notice back to the complainant (and again, only in 
> the event where the relay is unsuccessful and the P/P provider 
> receives a bounce-back email associated with that attempt), would save 
> time and headache for both complainants and P/Pproviders.
>
> In the non-proxy context, a complainant would directly receive the 
> bounce-back notification; I see no reason why a complainant should not 
> be equally informed when there is a proxy intermediary.
>
> Just my two cents on this issue, and look forward to further 
> discussion on the subject.  Enjoy the weekend!
>
> -Griffin
>
>
> Griffin M. Barnett
> Silverberg, Goldman & Bikoff, LLP
> 1101 30th Street NW
> Suite 120
> Washington, DC 20007
> (202) 944-3307
> gbarnett at sgbdc.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list
> Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg/attachments/20140801/59a24504/attachment.html>