<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Cambria;
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Cambria",serif;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:768963109;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:2094052580 -1034787646 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:-;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:2002732006;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-559921822 590361838 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-start-at:2;
mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:-;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:Wingdings;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Dear TPR WG members,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Please find below the brief notes and action items from today’s meeting. <b><i><o:p></o:p></i></b></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">The next meeting will be on Tuesday, 18 April at 1600 UTC.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Best regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-bottom:double windowtext 2.25pt;padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Emily, Julie, Berry, and Caitlin<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">ACTION ITEMS/HOMEWORK: </span></b><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Staff to initiate a small team to develop a proposal/language to
codify the informal transfer resolution process. Volunteers on the call: Jody Kolker, Rich Brown, Owen Smigelski Juan Manuel Rojas, Zak Muscovitch and Jothan Frakes.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Notes:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Transfer Policy Review - Meeting #86</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Proposed Agenda</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">11 April 2023</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> </span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">1. Roll Call & SOI updates<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">2. Welcome and Chair Updates<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Project Workplan: Reminder that early input on Phase 2 topics is due on week from today (18 April). No open action items. Hoping to wrap
up TEAC/TDRP by ICANN77.<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">3. Update – Issue Identified at ICANN76 regarding TDRP Section 3.2.4(ii)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Issue raised by George Kirikos was that if the Gaining Registrar couldn’t provide the Gaining FOA, that could be grounds to reverse the
transfer. Can’t currently provide the FOA due to GDRP.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Now an explanatory banner noting that not providing the Gaining FOA cannot be grounds for reversal of a transfer.<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">4. Visual Overview of TEAC, Informal Resolution, and TDRP<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">See attached document.<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Notes:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">TEAC is just an expedited response to an informal process.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">If registrar don’t agree an option could be to file a TDRP, but this is a lengthy and expensive process, so that may be why it’s rarely
used.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Other options if registrars still disagree are ICANN Compliance and the courts.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">The informal resolution without the TEAC is the focus of our gap analysis.<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Discussion:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Page 1 – missing is what happens if Gaining Registrar doesn’t make contact within 4 hours per TEAC – ICANN Compliance option.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Question: Are there policies that the registrar has to respond if the registrant asks to start a TEAC? Courts may not be an easy path.
Answer: The registrar today is the one responsible to initiating the TEAC contact in a transfer dispute. High 99 percent of the time the registrar is responding to a registrant, but there is no policy obligation to do so.
<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">5. Continuation of Gap Analysis Discussion – Transfer Reversal (<a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1Mq-Zu-fTdu4xrI1h1YPB1ITGRTxAp2gKzef7cTkgnNg/edit__;!!PtGJab4!_wWN-eOacakbj8KkEqW5PCaSX-24eSUbNSEjpRySBE1vDyBQ8seLfz1KrDKRbpsOUN5VEO3STjXj0-562aaM6R9GfHBT1l3c6w$" title="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Mq-Zu-fTdu4xrI1h1YPB1ITGRTxAp2gKzef7cTkgnNg/edit__;!!PtGJab4!_wWN-eOacakbj8KkEqW5PCaSX-24eSUbNSEjpRySBE1vDyBQ8seLfz1KrDKRbpsOUN5VEO3STjXj0-562aaM6R9GfHBT1l3c6w$">working
document [docs.google.com]</a>)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">I. Codify Informal Resolution</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoListParagraph" style="color:#444746;margin-left:0in;line-height:15.0pt;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1;background:white">
<span style="letter-spacing:.15pt">Jothan Frakes: Add “</span><span style="color:black">Reversion of Name Servers for the domain name in focus” under “Codify Informal Resolution”:
</span><span style="letter-spacing:.15pt">We haven't necessarily sounded this out, but in about 50% of the times I have been in the chain or worker on a TEAC-type contact, the DNS reversion sorted out the matter and reversion was not needed.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Roger: We will cover that next. Spent two weeks on this section. Make sure the groups come together and are making statements as a group.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Staff recap of Part 1: There was some support and some opposition for creating a process around the steps involved in informal resolution,
and only where specific actions apply. Some thought this would create transparency and better metrics, others had concerns about burdens for non-compliance and gaming. Also seems to be creating a form of TDRP, so duplicative and burdensome. Invite advocates
to volunteer to put pen to paper.<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">DNS Reversion:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From Jothan Frakes: Gaining Registrar: Large corporation buys a domain for marketing campaign, staff transfer to a new registrar in the
midst of the campaign – resolution was to revert the name servers to the previous domain. So, wasn’t a transfer dispute but originated there. DNS reversion solved the problem.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Roger: May have originated in the dispute process, but doesn’t seem to fall in this section, which is focused on whether and how to codify
informal resolution.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Rick Wilhelm: Not really a transfer dispute, more that my domain name is broken.
<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Informal Poll: In favor or not to codify the informal process (hands up)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Note: Registries are not opposed to codifying, unless and until new requirements are placed on Registries.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">To formalize, we may need to form a small group to work on this.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Codification is a better word here than formalization, as the latter could suggest adding requirements to the current informal process.<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">In favor: 7<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Not in favor: 0<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">I.A. Additional Element for consideration: DNS Reversal<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Discussion:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Recognition that if we do something it could do impact DNSSEC, but we aren’t here to suggest solutions, but could acknowledge the issue.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Jim Galvin: Both the NS records themselves and the zone contents that have to be considered and recommendations made regarding the various
configurations.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Didn’t associate Section 1 Codifying to I.A. – these are new issues.
<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Maybe it should be mandatory for the Gaining Rr to revert the NS upon notification of a formal (codified) transfer dispute. IF that dispute
includes the request to revert the NS.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">If there is a trigger to make reversal mandatory/automatic there may not be merit for it.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">If the TEAC is not responsive in 4 hours, everything after that is not automatic. Someone has to make a decision.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">This reversal shouldn’t be automatic.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Keep in mind, you can’t just revert the NS. You have to consider where the zone contents are and make sure those are also “reverted”.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Think how the reversal would happen should be codified.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">What do you do if there are uncooperative parties? This is very complicated, but if they are cooperative, why bother. If uncooperative
then it would be complicated and a lot of work.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Codifying would be of the current process to make it more transparent.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">I think even parties who want to cooperate may hesitate if there is not a formal process, as then they may be concerned about liability
if it turns out they did the wrong thing? so having a process they can point to as a reason for what they did may help?<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Think there are two issues: 1) codifying for transparency; 2) codifying in more detail in case of disputes.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">My “origin story” for this “codification” mechanism was about helping to ensure that the entire community of Registrars understands the
“best practices” of informal resolution that exist between the leading registrars in the industry. That way, if all the registrars know how to do these informal resolutions, there should be more of them and they should happen quicker and more routinely.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">The most important part of this process is when the registrars don’t agree.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Three separate things: 1) TEAC for emergency contacts; 2) Codified formerly-informal inter-Rr process for disputes; 3) TDRP for disputes
that can't be resolved in 2.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">For the informal process – having a list of steps would be an important checklist and provides consistency.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">May be the next step is to gather a small team to write up the friendly path to be codified, and to help us to see if there is something
missing.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">A transfer could still follow the process and still be problematic.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">It’s troubling that the TRP is limited in scope as Sarah points out. I was thinking that maybe a registrant initiated procedure could possibly
encompass the other scenarios (in addition to the possibility of revising the current TDRP itself).<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">E.g. in TDRP it says "A dispute must be filed no later than twelve (12) months after the alleged violation of the Transfer Policy." - so
it requires a violation of the Policy, and describe, in accordance with the Transfer Policy, the grounds on which the Complaint is based…<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">ACTION ITEM: Staff to initiate a small team to develop a proposal/language to codify the informal transfer resolution process. Volunteers on the call: Jody Kolker, Rich
Brown, Owen Smigelski Juan Manuel Rojas, Zak Muscovitch and Jothan Frakes.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">I.B. Additional Element for consideration: Locking<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Discussion:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Should be similar in steps to the DNS reversal among friendly parties.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Worthwhile also discussing in the small team.<o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">If there are extended lock periods by mutual agreement, maybe there should be a set of best practices, in particular notifications to the
registrant – would those be automatic?<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">I.D. Additional Element for consideration: “Escalation” to TDRP<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Discussion:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoPlainText" style="mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Clarification that everyone is on the same page: TDRP is the next logical step, not automatic. That is a decision point that has to be
made by the parties.<o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">6. AOB<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>