Maybe the parked page should indicate that the domain has expired and give information to the registrant as to how to renew. One thing that I have experienced often is that small businesses in particular hire fly-by-night web developers to set up their domain, email etc., and often the developer moves on, thecontract ends, or s/he disappears. The client has no idea what is going on, and the notifications go to the developer's email, and are not forwarded to the business. One day the whole thing shuts down. If the parking page indicates what is going on, the client has an opportunity (if the domain is actually registered in their name, and not the developer's) to renew, or try to get in touch with the developer or even register a new domain and transfer their services (but a lot wiser than the first time...) Otherwise they have no idea what is going on... unless they find a consultant who can help them. Jacqueline A. Morris Technology should be like oxygen: Ubiquitous, Necessary, Invisible. On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
At 27/07/2010 08:28 AM, Jacqueline Morris wrote:
Hi Re Sebastien's points - 1) If there have been many notifications via email, phone or letter at least 60 days IN ADVANCE, then it's fine to shut down port 80 on expiration
Note that this is what virtually every registrar does not - to put up their own parked page.
2) I agree with shutting down all services including email IF there is a requirement for an alternative email address (not at the domain that is being registered) at registration time, and that email address needs to be kept current by the registrant. It certainly would not make sense to send notices or information on expiry to an email address at a domain that has expired!
I think that this is a good recommendation, but to make it an absolute requirement is not likely possible. It would be mind-bogling to a innocent first time user who is just trying to get a blogging/web site up and chances are that if they go out and et a hotmail account for the purposes they will never look at it.
Jacqueline A. Morris Technology should be like oxygen: Ubiquitous, Necessary, Invisible.
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 2:50 AM, Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com> wrote:
Thanks Alan, Hello all, Please find my ideas on the propose text bellow. All the best
Sébastien Bachollet sebastien@bachollet.com +33 6 07 66 89 33
-----Message d'origine----- De : at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large- bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Alan Greenberg Envoyé : lundi 26 juillet 2010 21:12 À : At-Large Worldwide Objet : [At-Large] Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery Importance : Haute
The Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery PDP has posted their Initial Report. You will recall that the PDP was initiated by an ALAC Request for Issues Report. The Public Comment Period is open at http://icann.org/en/public-comment/#pednr-initial-report. It is scheduled to close on August 1, but hopefully it will be extended.
An ALAC comment on this report has been drafted. It can be found at https://st.icann.org/gnso- liaison/index.cgi?at_large_gnso_liaison#pednr. It is also reproduced below for your convenience. The comment will be discussed and possibly endorsed at the 27 July ALAC meeting. The comment follows the expected outcomes outlined in the initial Request for Issues Report and also is in line with the views of the majority of At-Large participants in the Working Group.
For PEDNR, the Public Comment process features an easy-to-complete survey. Since this policy development process was initiated by At-Large, it is REALLY important that as many At-Large people as possible complete the survey.
PLEASE:
- Review the comments below to see the At-Large position; - If you have the time, review the Initial Report; - Complete the short survey (it can be done without reading the full report). The survey is at <http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22AUYRGHCV4>http://www.zoomerang.co m/Survey/WEB22AUYRGHCV4.
Alan
--------------------------------------
The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) requested the Issues Report which resulted in the Post-Expiration Domain Name Recovery PDP, and it strongly supports the activities of the Working Group.
It is essential that the post-expiration "safety net" that existed several years ago be restored. Moreover, the domain industry is sufficiently robust and mature that it can and must provide a level of predictability and security to gTLD domain name holders.
In line with the desired outcomes stated in the original Issue Report request, the ALAC supports:
1. Consensus policy requiring that all registrars must allow renewal of domain names for a reasonable amount of time after expiration. 2. Consensus policy explicitly stating the minimum requirements for pre-expiration notices. 3. Consensus policy requiring clarity of how messages will be sent. 4. Consensus policy requiring that WHOIS contents to make it clear that a domain name has expired and has not yet been renewed by the registrant. [SBT] Here I am questioning how this can be gamed. The risk is that the end-user will received proposal for other (registrars, resellers...) and put more question than solution to him. 5. Consensus policy requiring that notice(s) be sent after expiration. 6. Consensus policy requiring that web sites (port 80) no longer can resolve to the original web site after expiration. [SBT] I don't think it is the best way to re-inform an end-user that the DN has expired. It will create more problem than solution. I am in favor of using all the other possibilities (e-mail, postal mail, phone) but not to stop any service. 7. Consensus policy requiring that other uses of the domain name (e-mail, FTP, etc.) no longer function after expiration. [SBT] Idem than 6 - for e-mail more specifically, because we are sure then that he will not be able to received update from the registrar and the registry and will not be able to interact with them. 8. Consensus policy requiring clarity in the expiration terms and fees offered by registrars. 9. Consensus policy requiring that the Redemption Grace Period be offered by all registries (including future gTLDs) and by all registrars.
It is understood that there may be unusual cases where the business models of some registrars may require exceptions to some of these policies. However, the need for such exceptions should not deny the vast majority of registrants a predictable and safe gTLD eco-system.
Over and above these minimum requirements, the ALAC supports a move within the registrar community to establish the meaningful and transparent concept of "best practices". _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge- lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org