Rubens
The
choice of words, at least in my view, is quite important.
Accreditation
in ICANN-land infers creating contractual relationships that
may not be desirable for anyone.
Certification
or “approval” suggests that the entity has met certain
requirements either via some form of test or by stating that
they’d do (or not do) certain things.
Both
options create a form of standard.
As
for the data – I disagree.
Regards
Michele
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland
Company No.: 370845
What about obligations on the
backend providers to release data? Ie. In the
case where a registry switches backend provider.
Data is already stored at escrow
provider, so the easier way for a registry to get its
data is authorizing the escrow provider to allow a
different backend to access data.
One obligation that is more
interesting to impose on backend providers is to
cooperate with the transition, notably the DNSSEC
transition.
While I agree that any potential
accreditation system / process should be
lightweight (maybe it should be “certification”
and not “accreditation”?) I also think that baking
in a couple of other elements to it wouldn’t hurt.