The change isn’t New
Year’s eve – it’d be March 2019
The issue is that the EC
isn’t engaging constructively with registrars or our
clients, so it’s a total mess.
Allowing existing
registrants to keep their .eu domains would be the sanest
way forward, but the EC doesn’t seem to be willing to
discuss it.
And they’ve also started
some insane plan about expanding who can qualify for a .eu
domain name without any real thought into how that can be
made a reality.
Oh the fun
Regards
Michele
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93
X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
Danko,
About EURID, I stand corrected, it is the
EU who sets the rules. EURID only enforces them as operator.
I fully agree with you, it is all part of
the global package and nobody wants to start showing what
the possible compromise points will be. The problems, from
the operation’s point of view, is that in case of no
compromise they have to do the job overnight on New Year’s
Eve and that this will happen before the Brexit deadline, so
even if a negotiation will be successful in 2019 the TLD
changes could have been effective already.
A big mess, where, as usual, politics
dictates and common sense, once again, shows to be far less
“common” than we think.
I understand
that it is not up to EURID, but to EC (European
Commission), that hold the contract with EURID
to manage to TLDs.
The problem
seems to be that possible solution
(grandfathering clause) cannot be discussed
outside of the whole package of Brexit
negotiations, effectively blocking any
reasonable progress.
Hi Barry.
You might have a point in principle.
However the reality is that each TLD can
decide its own rules, and therefore whether to
be strict in terms of requirements - like for
instance .bank - or loose - like for instance
.com.
.eu has chosen the first approach, and has all
right to do so. Whether EURID is willing to
make an exception for Brexit - based also on
the consideration that, as far as I know, they
do not make continuous checking about whether
the resistant still complies with the
requirements - or not, I don’t know.
Apparently not.
Cheers,
Roberto
On
17.08.2018, at 19:31, bzs@theworld.com wrote:
Ok I'll say it...
How many of these affected *.EU domains were
actually entities with
some sort of EU charter or relationship as
the TLD was approved for in
2005?
I realize it's naive to point out that .NET
was for networking
organizations and .ORG for not-for-profits
etc. in a world where we
have .XYZ and .FAIL (must they really be
FAILures?)
Ok that ship has sailed because no one
wanted to enforce it as it
would interfere with maximazing domain sales
in those TLDs.
But are we really supposed to get lathered
up about those who now got
burned flouting all that?
What promise do those affected actually
expect to be upheld? Chapter
and verse not "well, we assumed..."?
And, no, marching out one or two bona-fide
examples doesn't quite rise
to a counter argument.
If there were only one or two or ten I'll
guess they could be handled
since they would have always had a legitimae
reason to represent
themselves with a .EU domain which one would
hope would allow them
some explicit accommodation.
--
-Barry Shein
Software Tool & Die | bzs@TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1
617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989 | A Public
Information Utility | *oo*
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list
At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________
At-Large mailing list
At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org