Em 5 de fev de 2016, à(s) 21:06:000, Francisco Arias <francisco.arias@icann.org> escreveu:

On 2/3/16, 4:31 AM, "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com> wrote:

...

Francisco, about a month ago I sent this message to this list:

http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gtld-tech/2016-January/000577.html

You asked a few clarifying questions, which I answered. My last reply sent on 13 January:

http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gtld-tech/2016-January/000592.html

I never did receive an answer to my original question:

"Will those that do not be able to defer implementation until the needed "agreement provision, waiver, or Consensus Policy" terms are in place?"

Since we are considering at least 6 months between request and deadline to implement RDAP, I’d think an interested registry would have enough time to follow the process prescribed in its agreement to obtain an amendment to have differentiated access, no?

Francisco, Considering the past performance of ICANN in RSEP processes that extended far beyond 6 months, that is a very risky proposition... ... but we would welcome having SLAs for ICANN Registry Services and Technical Services, of course. Rubens

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 8:00 AM, Hollenbeck, Scott <shollenbeck@verisign.com> wrote:

Probably not. As Rubens noted, there are no SLAs in place for ICANN responsiveness. If I have an obligation to deliver something without differentiated access I have to do that software development work under the assumption that no amendment will be in place before the clock stops ticking. It would be much more efficient to start the work knowing what the end system needs to be because mid-stream changes to software requirements and design or extensive modifications to add new features later are both inefficient and expensive.

Which is why Andrew Sullivan's proposal is especially nice. It is backwards compatible with today's policy, but puts the registry operators in a very good position to adapt to any future changes. As much as this thread has turned into a pile-on of ICANN, I think the registry operators should start doing this. As the saying goes: actions speak louder than words. -andy