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. Cheers, Roberto On 20.08.2018, at 13:53, Danko Jevtović <danko@jevtovic.rs<mailto:danko@jevtovic.rs>> wrote: 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. Danko From: At-Large <at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Roberto Gaetano Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 1:09 PM To: bzs@theworld.com<mailto:bzs@theworld.com> Cc: At Large <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [At-Large] A brexit problem that I heard about 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<mailto: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<mailto:bzs@TheWorld.com> | http://www.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<mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org<http://atlarge.icann.org/> _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org