<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"><style>body { line-height: 1.5; }blockquote { margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.5em; }div.FoxDiv20210518093005241100 { }body { font-size: 15px; font-family: Calibri; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); line-height: 1.5; }</style></head><body>
<div><span></span>Hi Steve,</div><div><br></div><div> My suggestion is that when the registrant moves their registration to another registrars, as the gaining registrar, it should be able to allow the registrant to use the current DNS service during the inter-registrars transfer process or after the inter-registrars transfer is completed, then it can be solved and without a disruption in resolution. In my opinion, this is not a complicated function. Thanks. </div><div><br></div><div>Best regards,</div><div>Min Feng</div>
<div><br></div><hr style="width: 210px; height: 1px;" color="#b5c4df" size="1" align="left">
<div><span><div style="margin: 10px;"><div><font face="verdana"><span style="font-size: 13.3333px; line-height: 20px;">International Affairs Team</span></font></div><div><font face="verdana"><span style="font-size: 13.3333px; line-height: 20px;">22Net, Inc</span></font></div><div><font face="verdana"><span style="font-size: 13.3333px; line-height: 20px;">Phone: +86-571-88276021</span></font></div><div><font face="verdana"><span style="font-size: 13.3333px; line-height: 20px;">Fax: +86-571-88276022</span></font></div><div><font face="verdana"><span style="font-size: 13.3333px; line-height: 20px;">Address: 11/F,Bldg No.2, Hangzhou Internet Innovation Pioneer Park, No.176 Zixia Street, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China</span></font></div><div><font face="verdana"><span style="font-size: 13.3333px; line-height: 20px;">Post code:310030</span></font></div></div></span></div>
<blockquote style="margin-Top: 0px; margin-Bottom: 0px; margin-Left: 0.5em; margin-Right: inherit"><div> </div><div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm"><div style="PADDING-RIGHT: 8px; PADDING-LEFT: 8px; FONT-SIZE: 12px;FONT-FAMILY:tahoma;COLOR:#000000; BACKGROUND: #efefef; PADDING-BOTTOM: 8px; PADDING-TOP: 8px"><div><b>From:</b> <a href="mailto:steve@shinkuro.com">Steve Crocker</a></div><div><b>Date:</b> 2021-05-18 09:01</div><div><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:owen.smigelski@namecheap.com">Owen Smigelski</a></div><div><b>CC:</b> <a href="mailto:gnso-tpr@icann.org">gnso-tpr@icann.org</a></div><div><b>Subject:</b> Re: [GNSO-TPR] Concurrent changes; transfer of DNS service</div></div></div><div><div class="FoxDiv20210518093005241100"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#0000ff">Owen,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#0000ff"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#0000ff">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.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#0000ff"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#0000ff">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.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#0000ff"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#0000ff">Steve</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#0000ff"><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 8:49 PM Owen Smigelski via GNSO-TPR <<a href="mailto:gnso-tpr@icann.org">gnso-tpr@icann.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">Hi Steve,<div><br></div><div>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. </div><div><br></div><div>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. </div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Owen</div><div><div><br><blockquote type="cite" style="margin-top: 0px;"><div>On May 16, 2021, at 20:53, Steve Crocker <<a href="mailto:steve@shinkuro.com" target="_blank">steve@shinkuro.com</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,255)">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.</div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,255)"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,255)">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.</div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,255)"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,255)">Thanks,</div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,255)"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,255)">Steve</div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,255)"><br></div></div><div class="gmail_quote"></div></div>
<span id="gmail-m_-8412056280012638031cid:f_kos2ht5c0"><Consideration of Multiple Changes and the Inclusion of DNS Operations v2.docx></span>_______________________________________________<br>GNSO-TPR mailing list<br><a href="mailto:GNSO-TPR@icann.org" target="_blank">GNSO-TPR@icann.org</a><br><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-tpr" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-tpr</a></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>
GNSO-TPR mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:GNSO-TPR@icann.org" target="_blank">GNSO-TPR@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-tpr" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-tpr</a></blockquote></div></div>
</div></div></blockquote>
</body></html>