[GNSO-TPR] Concurrent changes; transfer of DNS service

Jothan Frakes jothan at jothan.com
Tue May 18 05:04:07 UTC 2021

Hi Steve-

I tend to agree with Owen about focus and scope with the transfer stuff -
keeping a keen focus on getting things done.  You're raising good points
and thinking of the registrant, which is something that is good for us all
to be doing.

Considering the things you are raising is helpful to factor in along the
way so we don't complete our process with zero awareness of DNS information
transfer, but the focus seems on the Registration vs the Resolution
parallel paths of transfer, because that's been what is in focus with all
the EPDP _stuff_ and the transfers happen most entirely within the SRS on
the registration side.  Auth-Info Codes, Status Code lifecycles,
validations, etc. are all in the EPP/SRS world.

DNSSEC _might_ creep into scope due to the way DNSSEC was put into the
world.  The registrant's registrar for a given domain is the only path to
adding the records for a given name to the registry.  Most folks get this
set up at the gaining registrar or 3p service and then update the info on
the losing registrar early or pre-transfer.

With respect to transfers on the rest of the Resolution side of things....
Typically, in a transfer scenario, the DNS resolution _stuff_ is addressed
by the registrant as a separate and sometimes parallel project path.

Also typically, the gaining registrar gets set up first with the DNS zone,
either record by record through painful user interfaces or in whole zone
fashion, OR there is a third party DNS provider being used so the name move
really is completely separate.

If one looks at the process through a commercial lens, the gaining
registrar is motivated more than the losing registrar to help or develop
tools for this, which I can't fault the logic of.  That said, most
registrars in the RrSG go out of their way to help
their customers/registrants where they can due to the relational nature of
the business.


Jothan Frakes

On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 6:01 PM Steve Crocker <steve at shinkuro.com> wrote:

> Owen,
> Thanks.  The touchstone for me is whether a registrant can successfully
> transfer his registration from one registrar to another.  With respect to
> the registrant's DNS service, I believe this is most often provided free of
> charge by the registrar as part of the registrar's service.  As a
> consequence, when the registrant moves their registration to
> another registrar, they will also have to move their DNS service.  As
> things stand, I believe this often means there will be a disruption in
> resolution.  And for a signed zone, this also means a disruption in
> validation.
> If I understand your point, you're saying because this was not raised in
> the issues report, it's not in scope for this PDP.  Putting these points
> together, the goal for this PDP is to reach consensus on how a registrant
> can transfer their registration from one registrar to another with the
> understanding they will likely not be able to sustain uninterrupted service.
> Steve
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:49 PM Owen Smigelski via GNSO-TPR <
> gnso-tpr at icann.org> wrote:
>> Hi Steve,
>> Regarding inter-registrar transfers, that is covered by the Temp Spec
>> (specifically Appendix G, Section 1.2). I do not think it needs to be tied
>> to the inter-registrant process due to the post-Temp Spec transfer process
>> due to limited registrant data in the RDDS.
>> While I think the other issues you raise are worthy of consideration,
>> they are outside of the scope for Phase 1a: gaining/losing FOA, auth-code
>> management, and Wave 1, Recommendation 27. Looking ahead, I do not see them
>> in the other phases as well. While I appreciate a desire for a holistic
>> review, this PDP is bound by its charter which is based upon concerns
>> raised in the issues report (which did not mention those items). We need to
>> be wary of scope creep to ensure that we can timely focus on and resolve
>> the items identified in our charter.
>> Regards,
>> Owen
>> On May 16, 2021, at 20:53, Steve Crocker <steve at shinkuro.com> wrote:
>> On the call Friday, I commented that a change of registrar may also
>> require a change in DNS service at the same time.  I also asked if the
>> distinction between inter-registrant and inter-registrant mentioned in the
>> charter covered the case where both the registrant and registrar were
>> changing at the same time.
>> Attached is a note digging into these cases.  In brief, I
>> recommend consideration of both the one-at-a-time changes AND full
>> understanding of how to make multiple changes.
>> Thanks,
>> Steve
>> <Consideration of Multiple Changes and the Inclusion of DNS Operations
>> v2.docx>_______________________________________________
>> GNSO-TPR mailing list
>> GNSO-TPR at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-tpr
>> _______________________________________________
>> GNSO-TPR mailing list
>> GNSO-TPR at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-tpr
> _______________________________________________
> GNSO-TPR mailing list
> GNSO-TPR at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-tpr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-tpr/attachments/20210517/89b1cc3e/attachment.html>

More information about the GNSO-TPR mailing list