[gtld-tech] Do not implement before date in CL&D and RDAP profile

[Francisco Arias]

Dear colleagues,

Apologies for the confusion caused, I wrote "do not implement before" when I meant "do not deploy before" date. In other words, we are proposing to have a date for when this new functionality can be turned on. Contracted parties can, of course, start implementation/development at their convenience. ICANN’s objective for the do not deploy before date is to allow ICANN’s tools to be updated to account for the changes required by CL&D, thus preventing our tools from generating false non-conformance reports during testing and/or monitoring.  

After discussing this internally, we think we only need this date for the CL&D policy and not for RDAP. As a reminder, the CL&D policy only applies to registries.

In summary, we are proposing to have a "do not deploy before" date for the CL&D policy that only applies to registries.

Regards,

-- 
Francisco


On 7/13/16, 6:23 PM, "Michele Neylon - Blacknight" <michele at blacknight.com> wrote:

    This is contrary to how changes are normally implemented and I suspect quite a few of us would have issues with this. 
    These kind of changes are of zero benefit to registrars and are only implemented as a contractual obligation. Imposing further restrictions on when we can implement them has a non-zero impact on us, so I would oppose this
    
    Regards 
    
    Michele 
    
    Mr Michele Neylon
    Blacknight Hosting & Domains
    http://www.blacknight.host/
    http://www.mneylon.social
    Sent from mobile so typos and brevity are normal 
    
    > On 13 Jul 2016, at 21:20, Francisco Arias <francisco.arias at icann.org> wrote:
    > 
    > Dear colleagues,
    > 
    > As you may recall the gTLD RDAP profile and Thick Whois policy implementation – Consistent Labeling and Display (CL&D for short) are synchronized and have a proposed effective date of 1 February 2017. This means enforcement would start on that date. However, in monitoring compliance with a given policy or contractual requirement we also need time to develop our tools and be able to *not* report false compliance issues (e.g., our current tool would raise an issue if it encounters the new Whois output that is specified in CL&D). We need to update that tool to avoid that issue from happening.
    > 
    > We’d like to add to both CL&D and the RDAP profile a “do not implement before” date to avoid the aforementioned issue. We are thinking we are going to need approximately four months to update/build our tools be able to identify the updated Whois output and RDAP output. That would give contracted parties approximately a two-month window for release before the effective. We are planning to add such a date to the documents, unless there is a reason why people think we should not. 
    > 
    > Regards,
    > 
    > -- 
    > Francisco
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 
    >