[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Proposed Agreement for Original Registration Date

[Chuck]

Andrew is correct that we reached a tentative agreement that this element would not be included in the RDS.  We could revisit it later as with all of our rough consensus agreements but for now I think it would be best to move on.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Sullivan
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 11:18 AM
To: gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] Proposed Agreement for Original Registration Date

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:59:57PM -0400, Sam Lanfranco wrote:
> Retaining a history of the registration of a domain name, when there 
> is an issue of abuse, fraud, etc.,  seems to me both a bit more 
> complicated and messy, and of limited added value for due diligence.

First, I thought we were done with this topic, and that we had already decided that we weren't going to add the ORD,

Anyway, the point of the ORD was in fact to catch precisely this "recent-registration-abuse" stuff: if you look up a name and discover that it had an old ORD and yet the crDate is recent, you have _prima facie_ evidence that the name object in question might not be the one you think it is.

Best regards,

A

--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg