[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS Statement of Purpose

[Michael D. Palage]

Jim,

Thanks for constructive feedback.  I was not trying to advocate that the appearance in the zone file meant anything. I was just trying to document different life cycle states that may or may not be readily available to the public.

One of the main reasons I joined this group is because I have a number of clients that would like to try some "innovation" within in the domain name industry and they view the RDS/Whois as a potential source of innovation. 

Sadly all too often policy discussions get high jacked by commercial interest focused primarily on the .COM and other legacy operators. By way of example, the "volumes" explicitly set forth in the Redemption Grace Period were based largely, if not solely, on what made sense for .COM transactions.  

Best regards,

Michael 

-----Original Message-----
From: James Galvin [mailto:jgalvin at afilias.info] 
Sent: Friday, September 9, 2016 10:32 AM
To: Michael D. Palage <michael at palage.com>
Cc: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] RDS Statement of Purpose



On 9 Sep 2016, at 9:46, Michael D. Palage wrote:

> During this Pending Create period the registrant has no control over 
> the domain name as it does not appear in the zone file, but does 
> appear in publicly available Whois data.

I think this is the most important point in your comment Michael.

Your statement asserts that registrant  control  of a domain name is dependent on whether or not the domain name appears in the zone file.

While you provide an excellent example in support of this in your description of pendingCreate, I believe your assertion to tightly-couple  control  with  zone presence  is inappropriate.

There are several statuses during which a domain name will not appear in a zone file and a registrant still has primary  control  of a domain name, e.g., pendingDelete, at which time a registrant could take action to get a domain name restored.  I consider this  control  in this case because no other registrant can acquire the domain name during this period.

I would propose another way to think about pendingCreate as follows:

First, I am not going to speak to the question of access to data via directory services at this time.  That is a separate discussion we are not having yet.  This discussion is strictly about the purpose of registration data.

In a pendingCreate situation where more than one registrant may have asserted the create event, all of the aforementioned registrants share the  control  of a domain name.  This  control  must be resolved to a single registrant before the pendingCreate expires or the create event itself expires and the domain name is returned to the  available pool , i.e., all registrants lose  control  of a domain name.

Jim