Quick notes, especially as it impacts the work of the WHOIS WG...and ALAC commitments. First, a declaration. There are always a few 'weasel phrases' lawyers tend to live and practice by, no big deal, IMHO. Moral of the story: take a gut and finger check, going in. Seems it continues to bind the Registrar to implementation of relevant consensus policies that wash the RAA. This gives standing for implementing things originating thru SSAC and other policy formulations hereafter. Very important 'gateway' principle, IMHO. Notably, there are changes to the format and content of the contractually obliged Monthly Report. Much of the new additions seems to zero in on identifying registrar viability in context of identifiable business model and the churn factor for registrations; that might be useful to help track automated registrations intended for fraudulent use, among other things. If you trace the five (5) criteria Contractual Compliance Review employ to determine if renewal should be without prejudice, WHOIS outcomes gets the short straw. Didn't see even a nod to WHOIS Accuracy enforcement here. Concerns building. This one contains provisions for: 1) adopting a new WHOIS protocol if and when it becomes available via the IETF process; this is the SAC051 production 2) Transitioning to the 'thick' WHOIS model, albeit on GNSO time. In *this context*, I'm challenged to understand the implications in the Discussion Draft on Page 9 "*Traffic Data*"? *Something is amiss.* Additional content is now requested for WHOIS matters; report the number of WHOIS queries for that month, segregated by service origination, i.e., Port 43 or Web service. Other significant changes; one in the WHOIS provisioning - public IPv6 transport support - and another for process - the query will return the name of the Registrar consistent with the IANA data. What is *striking* here is that *all* references to *registrant data* - meaning data on the actual person who registered the domain name and is putative owner - seems to have disappeared from the delimited WHOIS dataset referred in Appendix 5. In other words, the provisions of old *Clause 3 of the RAA now in force are 'disappeared'!* I stand to be corrected. - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>wrote:
.com Registry Agreement Renewal
http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-27mar12-en.htm
Executive Summary
ICANN is posting today for public comment Verisign's proposed agreement for renewal of the 2006 .com Registry Agreement between ICANN and Verisign. This proposal is a result of discussions between ICANN and VeriSign, and will be considered by the ICANN Board after public comment. The current agreement will expire on 30 November 2012. Public comment may be submitted through April 26, 2012 and viewed at: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/com-renewal-27mar12-en.htm
This summary describes important aspects of the registry agreement renewal process, the content of the proposed agreement renewal, and certain background to the proposed agreement. This summary is accompanied by the "red line" version of the agreement and several documents that describe and summarize the proposal. Upcoming agreements due to be renewed in 2012 such as .biz, .info, .name and .org will follow a similar process.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)