[CPWG] REMINDER: At-Large Input to Post-creation and Post-Transfer Locks

[Bill Jouris]

 Apologies, all, for putting this into the meeting reminder thread.  But perhaps it will save some time in the meeting. 
I would be a lot more comfortable with the last question if, instead of    
   - A Registry Operator MAY define a different transfer lock policy
it offered    
   - A Registry Operator MAY define a LONGER transfer lock, but not a SHORTER one, or 
   - A Registry Operator MAY define a SHORTER transfer lock, but not a LONGER one

Otherwise, we don't have a standard or a policy.  At most, we have a Best Practices recommendation.  And it would be clearer to say that explicitly. 
Bill Jouris 
    On Wednesday, March 16, 2022, 08:27:13 AM PDT, Heidi Ullrich via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org> wrote:  
 
  <!--#yiv9918170958 _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {}#yiv9918170958 #yiv9918170958 p.yiv9918170958MsoNormal, #yiv9918170958 li.yiv9918170958MsoNormal, #yiv9918170958 div.yiv9918170958MsoNormal {margin:0cm;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri", sans-serif;}#yiv9918170958 a:link, #yiv9918170958 span.yiv9918170958MsoHyperlink {color:#0563C1;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv9918170958 span.yiv9918170958EmailStyle18 {font-family:"Calibri", sans-serif;color:windowtext;}#yiv9918170958 .yiv9918170958MsoChpDefault {font-size:10.0pt;} _filtered {}#yiv9918170958 div.yiv9918170958WordSection1 {}#yiv9918170958 _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {} _filtered {}#yiv9918170958 ol {margin-bottom:0cm;}#yiv9918170958 ul {margin-bottom:0cm;}-->
Dear All,
 
  
 
Please see below important information for today’s CPWG discussion onPost-creation and Post-Transfer Locks within the context of the Transfer Policy Review PDP.
 
  
 
A series of polls will be shown during the discussion. The questions and relevant document are available in Steinar’s note.
 
  
 
Kind regards,
 
Heidi
 
  
 
From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
Reply to: Steinar Grøtterød <steinar at recito.no>
Date: Tuesday, 8 March 2022 at 4:31 AM
To: CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
Subject: [CPWG] At-Large Input to Post-creation and Post-Transfer Locks
 
  
 
Dear all CPWG members,
 
  
 
With the object to give background and a constructive discussion at the CPWG meeting, At-Large members in the GNSO Transfer Policy Review PDP have created a document focus on the PDP charter questions connected to Post-creation and Post-Transfer Locks.
 
  
 
The Google document located at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ht1fl9LAiqCvJCHCvY5eWao_lOBdKmgpr7kChLgwPEI/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com] should give the CPWG members the needed information to participate in an informal “poll”:
 
  
 
QUESTION TO BE DISCUSSED BY CPWG MEMBERS
 
For the post-creation lock question
 
  
 
What lock period will be of preference:
    
   - 10 days post-creation lock
   - 30 days post-creation lock
   - 60 days post-creation lock 
   - Not sure
   - Abstain
 
For the post-transfer lock question
 
What lock period will be of preference:
    
   - 10 days post-transfer lock
   - 30 days post-transfer lock
   - 60 days post-transfer lock 
   - Not sure
   - Abstain
 
For the question regarding Registry Operator 
    
   - Same policy for all Registry Operator
   - A Registry Operator MAY define a different transfer lock policy
   - Not sure
   - Abstain
 
  
 
I kindly ask the CPWG members to review theGoogle document [docs.google.com]. The CPWG chair may decide when to put this on the CPWG agenda.
 
  
 
Regards,
 
  
 
Steinar Grøtterød
 
  
 _______________________________________________
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/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20220316/2a1bd305/attachment.html>