BC,

Attached is a draft BC Position regarding the Initial Report produced by the Post Expiration Domain Name Recovery (PEDNER) Working Group (WG).  Per Marilyn’s notice of the Public Comment period for the WG is extended to 15 Aug 2010.   Please review and provide feedback or support, if any, by 13 Aug 10.  I will compile changes and resend a draft out on the 14^th for posting on the 15^th. 

The other BC WG participants have not had much of a chance to review this prior to this notice, so I invite them to comment where I may have misstated something.  This draft does not stray from our previous position statement of November 2009, but it does offer refinement to areas being considered for Consensus Policy (CP) with respect to expiration phase of a domain lifecycle.  I do not suspect much opposition regarding this PDP topic within the BC, but if you do have concerns, please voice them.  Specifically, we require refinement to concepts #8 through #12 & #18.  When reviewing the document take notice of the highlighted text, as it denotes what I suspect to be areas we need to seek agreement.

Key take-away(s) of PEDNER WG to this point:

· BP vs. CP – many of the concepts discussed within the PEDNER WG equally contend with the issue of whether change should be considered a non-binding “Best Practice” instead of a “Consensus Policy” change where by agreements with Contracted parties require modification. 

· Largest potential change with respect to Redemption Grace Period (RGP) becoming Consensus Policy.  Consistency is the primary driver for this change.  The chair of the GNSO, and as one of the contributors to RGP is on record having difficulty understanding why it was not created as Consensus Policy at inception.  To date, clear consensus on RGP is visible among the non-contracted parties and perhaps a few in the contracted party house.

· Other potential CP changes:

o Ability to recover a domain (CP) with a time to recover somewhere around 1 month

o Notice of expiration prior should occur at least twice (CP), minimum intervals and how they are to be sent

o Post-Expiration notices and other warnings (CP)

o Clarification within WHOIS status changes regarding expired domains

o Web and Email hosting services going Dark upon expiration (CP)

o Clarity in Agreements and Post Expiration fees (CP)

o Ability to transfer in an expired state & RGP (CP)

· Registrant education, perhaps sponsored by ICANN, is critical to reduce the consumer confusion

PEDNER – Social Text site:

https://st.icann.org/post-expiration-dn-recovery-wg/index.cgi

BC Members of WG:

· Mike Rodenbaugh – poll contributor

· Phil Corwin

· Mike O'Connor – poll contributor

· Michael Palage

· Berry Cobb – poll contributor

Please advise if you have questions.  Thank you, B

Berry Cobb

Infinity Portals LLC

berrycobb@infinityportals.com

http://infinityportals.com

720.839.5735