[gtld-tech] Registrar Expiration Date I-D

[Luis E. Muñoz]

On 27 Jan 2016, at 8:45, Thomas Corte wrote:

> On 27/01/2016 17:22, Greg Aaron wrote:
>> So I see three options:
>> 1. Registrar-based WHOIS will always be required, because of 
>> expiration date
>> variances we've been discussing here, caused by auto-renewals and 
>> registrar
>> payment policies.
>> 2. Registrar-based WHOIS goes away.  Registry WHOIS contains an 
>> Registry
>> Expiration Date AND a Registrar Expiration Date field.  The registrar
>> populates and manages the latter.
>> 3. Registrar-based WHOIS goes away.  The WHOIS only shows the 
>> registry
>> expiration date, and registrars and registrants have to communicate 
>> with
>> each other about expirations and payments etc.
>
>
> My personal preference would be 3, however (as said before) it seems 
> that
> registrant confusion about a domain's fate can best be avoided by 
> option 2.

I would argue that a significant portion of the Registrants reading

…yadda-yadda expiration date: <some date>
…yadda-yadda expiration date: <some other date>

will be a greater source of confusion, possibly causing support tickets 
that someone will need to address. That, in addition to all the work 
that having the two fields in the same place will cause. And to note, if 
dates do not match today, they won’t match after implementation of the 
proposed extension either. This looks more and more like the wong 
solution for a non-problem.

Luis Muñoz
Director, Registry Operations
____________________________

http://www.uniregistry.link/
2161 San Joaquin Hills Road
Newport Beach, CA 92660

Office +1 949 706 2300 x 4242
lem at uniregistry.link
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gtld-tech/attachments/20160127/9aa96574/attachment-0001.html>