[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Back to basics

Michael D. Palage michael at palage.com
Thu May 12 16:04:43 UTC 2016


Unfortunately, if a Registry wants to collect addition data and display it.
It needs ICANN permission since Specification 4 states what can be displayed
and in what format. So when .NYC, .CAPETOWN, .JOBURG and .DURBAN wanted to
add their additional fields for business purposes.  They first needed to
submit an RSEP and then get permission from ICANN to modify their Registry
Agreement. The way the Registry Agreement has been written and how ICANN has
interpreted "registry services" it gives ICANN incredible latitude to act as
a regulator instead of a mere technical coordinating body.

Best regards,


-----Original Message-----
From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org
[mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Klaus Stoll
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 2:55 AM
To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Back to basics

Dear WG

Thank you for a fascinating ongoing  discussion.

I wonder if in the context of data collection a back to basics approach
would be helpful: Only the data that is absolutely necessary to operate the
DNS in a stable and secure manner should be collected. Everything else is
out of the remit of ICANN. Additional data can be collected independently of
ICANN but only based on consent between registrars and registrants.

I know this approach is naive, but it might serve as a base line.


gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org

More information about the gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list