[IRT.RegDataPolicy] Rec5 IRT comments closing - collection

[Anderson, Marc]

Rubens, I agree with the points you made.  My comment had to do with the language of 5.8:



The Registrar MUST provide the opportunity for the RNH to provide the following data elements. If provided by the RNH, the Registrar MUST collect the following data elements:



That language just assumes one scenario where the Registrar is proving (but not required to provide) that information.  In 5.1 as an example, noting that some of the information comes from the registrar (rather than the registrant), the language is that the Registrar must collect OR generate.



Hopefully that helps.



Best,

Marc







From: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk at nic.br>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2019 1:51 PM
To: Anderson, Marc <mcanderson at verisign.com>
Cc: dennis.chang at icann.org; irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [IRT.RegDataPolicy] Rec5 IRT comments closing - collection









   Em 18 de out de 2019, à(s) 14:44:000, Anderson, Marc via IRT.RegDataPolicy <irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org<mailto:irt.regdatapolicy at icann.org>> escreveu:



   Dennis / IPT and IRT colleagues,



   I gave Rec #5 another read and I don’t think its quite ready to close.  I added comments directly to the Google document, but I’ll recap here as well.



   In 5.7 the Registrar Registration Expiration Date is listed as a MAY generate or collect.  I think we’ve discussed that this should actually be a MUST for Registrars and moved up to 5.1.  It’s the Registry Expiry Date that should be a MAY here.



   5.8 covers the optional Name Server and DNSSEC elements.  I understand that some Registrars offer Name Servers and DNSSEC signing as services.  I don’t think the language in 5.8 necessarily prohibits that, but I’m wondering if it would make sense to add language accounting for that scenario.  Maybe an implementation note mentioning that Registrars may provide that information as a service?



   Marc,



   This is not related to the registrar providing those services or not.



   On name servers, some TLDs do not require name servers for registering a domain, so a registration might exist without them, until the registrant wants to actually publish that delegation in the DNS, by providing name servers at that tme.



   On DNSSEC elements, at least one registrar mentioned that they don't store them; they just relay them to registry.



   But in all cases, the registrar are the point of entry of those information into the registry, regardless of providing DNS/DNSSEC services to that domain registration or not.





   Rubens



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/irt.regdatapolicy/attachments/20191018/001db3f3/attachment.html>