[CPWG] Considerations about the latest polls

Sun Nov 21 20:04:11 UTC 2021

 Dear all, 
I think Dr Gopal makes an excellent point.  Whatever the original reasons for introducing the lock, if someone now wants to change the length the burden should be on them to show significant benefits from doing so. 
In other words, "If it ain't** broke, don't fi it."   
Bill Jouris
For those not fluent in American English slang, that translates roughly into "is not"     On Saturday, November 20, 2021, 03:28:40 PM PST, gopal--- via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org> wrote:  

 Dear All,

In my humble opinion, a simple way to rationalize:

The 60-days lock was introduced in 1998/1999 and it withstood the
test of time in a domain that was seldom assured of "Crystal Ball
Gazing" even one year ahead.

Why think of changing without any very major significant gains ?

Your call please.

Sincerely,

Gopal T V
0 9840121302
https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545
https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dr. T V Gopal
Professor
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
College of Engineering
Anna University
Chennai - 600 025, INDIA
Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340
      (Res) 24454753
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

On 2021-11-21 02:04, Chokri Ben Romdhane wrote:
> dear Roberto,
> from what I understand , the 60 days lock did not guarantee the safety
> of the TRANSFER.
> 
> Chokri
> 
> Le sam. 20 nov. 2021 16:58, gopal--- via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org> a
> écrit :
> 
>> +1 Roberto Gaetano
>> 
>> "Safety First"
>> 
>> How safe is safe ? is another small big question in Systems.
>> 
>> In the answer we can bring the vital human.
>> 
>> Gopal T V
>> 0 9840121302
>> https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545
>> https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Dr. T V Gopal
>> Professor
>> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
>> College of Engineering
>> Anna University
>> Chennai - 600 025, INDIA
>> Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340
>> (Res) 24454753
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 
>> On 2021-11-20 21:05, Roberto Gaetano via CPWG wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>> 
>>> I have been thinking about the motivations given by some for
>> voting
>>> Y/N on the 60d period and on the enforcement of the policy. My
>>> observation is that those who do not want the 60d grace period are
>>> mostly worried about the inefficiencies, for instance
>> “unnecessary”
>>> delays in transferring between “good” actors. OTOH, those who
>> want the
>>> grace period are mostly concerned with the risk of criminal
>> actions
>>> that could benefit from a quick finalisation of the transfer.
>>> 
>>> I wonder therefore if the issue here is the balance between
>> efficiency
>>> and risk: if we want a system that is safer but slower, let’s
>> have the
>>> 60d period, if we want a system that is fast but less safe,
>> let’s
>>> eliminate the 60d.
>>> 
>>> Similar considerations apply in the case of “optional” vs
>> “compulsory”
>>> grace period. It seems obvious that those who are against the 60d
>> want
>>> at least to be able to have the “opt out” possibility, while
>> those who
>>> are convinced about the need for it want also to have it applied
>>> without exceptions (the reasoning behind this, as also pointed out
>> in
>>> the call, is that the wrongdoers will be obviously opting out).
>>> 
>>> In this situation the question is also whether the reduction of
>> the
>>> length off the period could be a sort of a compromise that gives a
>> bit
>>> to both parties - or whether the effect would be to make both
>> parties
>>> unhappy because the result could be neither sufficiently fast nor
>>> sufficiently secure.
>>> 
>>> I am for “slow and safe”, probably also due to age - younger
>> people
>>> might have a different approach… :-)
>>> 
>>> Have a nice weekend,
>>> Roberto
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CPWG mailing list
>>> CPWG at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of
>>> your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing
>> list
>>> accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
>>> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of
>>> Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the
>> Mailman
>>> link above to change your membership status or configuration,
>>> including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
>> disabling
>>> delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>> _______________________________________________
>> CPWG mailing list
>> CPWG at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of
>> your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list
>> accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
>> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of
>> Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the
>> Mailman link above to change your membership status or
>> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style
>> delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation),
>> and so on.
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/private/cpwg/attachments/20211121/ec955285/attachment.html>