[gtld-tech] Registrar Expiration Date I-D

[Pat Moroney]

I see what you are saying, but I think it would be even more confusing to
have a Registrar Registration Expiration Date on the whois result that
doesn't match when the service expires.

-Pat Moroney
Name.com

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016, 23:03 Francisco Obispo <francisco at obispo.link> wrote:

> It doesn’t have to be this way.
>
> A RAR can model the registry policy and auto-renew the name in its
> database, or keep the dates in sync via EPP <info> commands. There’s
> nothing that says that the expiration date has to remain in the past until
> the customer pays for it, the RAR has other means to inform its customer
> that the service has expired.
>
> regards,
>
> On 21 Jan 2016, at 21:29, Pat Moroney wrote:
>
> I personally don't yet have an opinion on whether we should implement this
> extension, but I did want to point out a very common case where the
> registry expiration date differs from the registrar expiration date. And
> that is during the autoRenew period. If the customer hasn't yet paid the
> registrar for a renewal, the registrar expiration date will be in the past,
> while the registry expiration date is a year in the future. I know for a
> fact that this can be confusing for registrants and happens in both thick
> and thin registries who autorenew domains at expiration. But, as I said
> before, I haven't looked extensively into this extension and the reasons
> for it yet, and there may be a easier or better way to remove the possible
> confusion.
>
> -Pat Moroney
> Name.com
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016, 21:26 Patrik Fältström paf at frobbit.se wrote:
>
> On 22 Jan 2016, at 3:22, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>
> I'm prepared to admit that registrars' data could be out of sync. But
> surely this ought to be a bulk operation?
>
> If things are out of sync, having both dates (that are out of sync) in the
> registry does not help.
>
> The registry expiration date, which is already in the registry, is
> definitely enough.
>
> What is in the business agreements between the registrar and registrant
> has nothing to do with the lifecycle of a domain name. And sure, some
> registrars do have, on request from their customers, coordinated payment
> cycles across all domains in the portfolio of the registrant. That the
> registrars today also expose those values in whois might be a bug, a
> feature or whatever. But we can not have as a goal that the registry should
> include information about those dates etc.
>
> Can we please instead try to make the lifecycle of a domain name *simpler*
>
>
> so people do understand it? Already today it is extremely complicated.
> Specifically in the end game, and yes, as pointed out, that is used by some
> registries and registrars in a way that is viewed by some as not 100% "ok".
>
> Patrik
>
> --
> -Pat Moroney
> Sr. Software Engineer
> Name.com
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1GKGXXF12c
> 720-663-0025
>
> --
-Pat Moroney
Sr. Software Engineer
Name.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1GKGXXF12c
720-663-0025
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gtld-tech/attachments/20160122/d0240bb1/attachment.html>