[gtld-tech] Registrar Expiration Date I-D

Greg Aaron greg at illumintel.com
Fri Jan 22 15:39:16 UTC 2016

I agree that registry data should prevail.  If the registrar has been out of synch with the registry regarding expiration dates, domain statues, etc., it's the registrar's fault.  Unfortunately those errors devolve upon registrants and cause problems for them.

We do not know how often or badly registrars are out of synch.  But I would expect some resulting registrant confusion when .COM and .NET go thick.

-----Original Message-----
From: gtld-tech-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gtld-tech-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Patrik Fältström
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2016 11:25 PM
To: Andrew Sullivan
Cc: gtld-tech at icann.org
Subject: Re: [gtld-tech] Registrar Expiration Date I-D

* PGP Signed by an unknown key

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".


* Unknown Key
* 0x0B88D7CD

More information about the gtld-tech mailing list