[gtld-tech] Registrar Expiration Date I-D

[Jody Kolker]

<
Since the registry doesn't have access to the life cycle of the registrar-registrant agreement, this value doesn't belong in the registry database -- any more than, say, the expiry date of the registrant's credit card belongs in the registry.  The reason for this is that it is dependent on the registrar's business logic, so it can't be in a shared repository like the registry.
>

+1

Thanks,
Jody Kolker

-----Original Message-----
From: gtld-tech-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gtld-tech-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Sullivan
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 5:27 PM
To: gtld-tech at icann.org
Subject: Re: [gtld-tech] Registrar Expiration Date I-D

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 05:17:59PM -0500, Andrew Newton wrote:
> Then can't the same be said of ANY new EPP extension? 

Any extension that would unnecessarily duplicate data from the side that has the direct relationship to the side that has the indirect relationship, yes.  In the case of contact data, the registry needs that because of the need for it in whois.  Anyway, it can be looked up in real time by the registrar.  (I know of at least one registrar that does that.)

The problem here is that this is data that _solely_ pertains to the relationship between the registrar and the registrant: it's about the lifetime of the contract between the registrant and the registrar, not about the life cycle of the domain object itself. 

Since the registry doesn't have access to the life cycle of the registrar-registrant agreement, this value doesn't belong in the registry database -- any more than, say, the expiry date of the registrant's credit card belongs in the registry.  The reason for this is that it is dependent on the registrar's business logic, so it can't be in a shared repository like the registry.

Best regards,

A

--
Andrew Sullivan
Dyn
asullivan at dyn.com