Hi Arthur, Thank you for your input. For a hint of clarification, this thread is in response to IRTP-C. Part D has yet to form an IRT. In regards to DMPM, should the WG choose to continue forward with that use case, the intent will be to seek input from that group. Thanks again. B Berry A. Cobb Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers 720.839.5735 <mailto:mail@berrycobb.com> mail@berrycobb.com @berrycobb From: owner-gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@icann.org] On Behalf Of Arthur Zonnenberg Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 03:09 To: Caitlin Tubergen; Knight, Barbara; gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@icann.org; Theo Geurts Subject: Re: [gnso-impl-irtpc-rt] Re: For your review: Change of Registrant/Transfer Policy - by Thursday 12 March Hi group, Thanks for the document, I have been quite busy and saw good contributions by Theo and others so was less actively present during this IRTP D. I still think registered name holder / user friendliness is not a part of ICANN policy and that more effort should be put into measuring current transfer performance. That said, I also notice the Working Group on Data & Metrics for Policy Making is brainstorming and searching for more specific input on what to do: http://gnso.icann.org/en/meetings/transcript-dmpm-24feb15-en.pdf Is there something we can do for them to provide that input? In any case, for this specific policy, please find my comments in addition to the document with Barbara's comments attached. Feedback welcome as always. Kind regards, Arthur Zonnenberg Product manager <https://www.hostnet.nl/> Hostnet Hostnet bv De Ruyterkade 6 | 1013 AA Amsterdam T: 020-7500834 | F: 020-7500825 <https://www.hostnet.nl/> www.hostnet.nl | <http://weblog.hostnet.nl/> weblog.hostnet.nl <https://nl-nl.facebook.com/Hostnetbv> Facebook <https://twitter.com/Hostnet> Twitter <https://www.linkedin.com/company/hostnet-bv> Linkedin On 2015-03-07 02:24, Caitlin Tubergen wrote: Hi Barbara, Thank you for your feedback! I have incorporated your changes/comments into the attached document, which uses the most recent version of the IRTP. Also, I took the liberty of adding some section numbers into the IRTP to it slightly more organized. Kind regards, Caitlin From: "Knight, Barbara" <BKnight@verisign.com> Date: Friday, March 6, 2015 at 2:38 PM To: Caitlin Tubergen <caitlin.tubergen@icann.org>, "gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@icann.org" <gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@icann.org>, Theo Geurts <theo.geurts@firstfind.nl> Subject: RE: For your review: Change of Registrant/Transfer Policy - by Thursday 12 March Caitlin, I have reviewed the latest draft and have a few comments / recommended edits (redlined in the attached). I will also be soliciting additional feedback from others in the Registry community but did not want to hold up getting my initial feedback over. I anticipate that any further feedback or comments that may be forthcoming from the Registry community can be provided during the comment period once it is posted for comments. Thanks for all of your efforts. Description: Description: cid:image001.gif@01CE562A.FB6F3EB0 Barbara Knight Director of Registry Compliance bknight@Verisign.com t: 703-948-3343 c: 703-622-1071 12061 Bluemont Way, Reston, VA 20190 <http://www.verisigninc.com/> VerisignInc.com Description: Description: Description: Description: VerisignT From: owner-gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@icann.org] On Behalf Of Caitlin Tubergen Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 10:19 PM To: gnso-impl-irtpc-rt@icann.org; Theo Geurts Subject: [gnso-impl-irtpc-rt] For your review: Change of Registrant/Transfer Policy - by Thursday 12 March Hi All, Thank you to everyone who participated in the call today. For those of you who were unable to attend, please find a link to the recording here: <https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p4howkg3hce/> https://icann.adobeconnect.com/p4howkg3hce/ During the call, we discussed the outstanding issue from our last call, which was the issue of third party privacy/proxy providers and the potential challenge of transmitting the change of registrant credential to the underlying registrant. The members of the IRT that were on the call with okay with the proposed solution, which you will find in footnote 1. The P/P issue was the last outstanding issue to discuss before we post the draft policy for public comment. I have attached the draft policy for your final review. You will note that this is the hybrid "Transfer Policy," which will go out for public comment. The Transfer Policy has two sections: the IRTP in section I, and the Change of Registrant in section II. The hybrid policy was recommended by the WG. As you may remember, we had already worked through recommendation 2, the time limiting of FOAs, before we began discussing the Change of Registrant function. If you have any final questions or comments on the draft policy, please submit them to me by Thursday, 12 March. Thank you! Kind regards, Caitlin
