Do not implement before date in CL&D and RDAP profile
Dear colleagues, As you may recall the gTLD RDAP profile and Thick Whois policy implementation – Consistent Labeling and Display (CL&D for short) are synchronized and have a proposed effective date of 1 February 2017. This means enforcement would start on that date. However, in monitoring compliance with a given policy or contractual requirement we also need time to develop our tools and be able to *not* report false compliance issues (e.g., our current tool would raise an issue if it encounters the new Whois output that is specified in CL&D). We need to update that tool to avoid that issue from happening. We’d like to add to both CL&D and the RDAP profile a “do not implement before” date to avoid the aforementioned issue. We are thinking we are going to need approximately four months to update/build our tools be able to identify the updated Whois output and RDAP output. That would give contracted parties approximately a two-month window for release before the effective. We are planning to add such a date to the documents, unless there is a reason why people think we should not. Regards, -- Francisco
This is contrary to how changes are normally implemented and I suspect quite a few of us would have issues with this. These kind of changes are of zero benefit to registrars and are only implemented as a contractual obligation. Imposing further restrictions on when we can implement them has a non-zero impact on us, so I would oppose this Regards Michele Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Hosting & Domains http://www.blacknight.host/ http://www.mneylon.social Sent from mobile so typos and brevity are normal
On 13 Jul 2016, at 21:20, Francisco Arias <francisco.arias@icann.org> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
As you may recall the gTLD RDAP profile and Thick Whois policy implementation – Consistent Labeling and Display (CL&D for short) are synchronized and have a proposed effective date of 1 February 2017. This means enforcement would start on that date. However, in monitoring compliance with a given policy or contractual requirement we also need time to develop our tools and be able to *not* report false compliance issues (e.g., our current tool would raise an issue if it encounters the new Whois output that is specified in CL&D). We need to update that tool to avoid that issue from happening.
We’d like to add to both CL&D and the RDAP profile a “do not implement before” date to avoid the aforementioned issue. We are thinking we are going to need approximately four months to update/build our tools be able to identify the updated Whois output and RDAP output. That would give contracted parties approximately a two-month window for release before the effective. We are planning to add such a date to the documents, unless there is a reason why people think we should not.
Regards,
-- Francisco
Hi Francisco, From my understanding on the call this RDAP profile is a Registry requirement right? Least that was the key take away for me from the last session this week. Thank you, Theo Michele Neylon - Blacknight schreef op 2016-07-14 03:23 AM:
This is contrary to how changes are normally implemented and I suspect quite a few of us would have issues with this. These kind of changes are of zero benefit to registrars and are only implemented as a contractual obligation. Imposing further restrictions on when we can implement them has a non-zero impact on us, so I would oppose this
Regards
Michele
Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Hosting & Domains http://www.blacknight.host/ http://www.mneylon.social Sent from mobile so typos and brevity are normal
On 13 Jul 2016, at 21:20, Francisco Arias <francisco.arias@icann.org> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
As you may recall the gTLD RDAP profile and Thick Whois policy implementation – Consistent Labeling and Display (CL&D for short) are synchronized and have a proposed effective date of 1 February 2017. This means enforcement would start on that date. However, in monitoring compliance with a given policy or contractual requirement we also need time to develop our tools and be able to *not* report false compliance issues (e.g., our current tool would raise an issue if it encounters the new Whois output that is specified in CL&D). We need to update that tool to avoid that issue from happening.
We’d like to add to both CL&D and the RDAP profile a “do not implement before” date to avoid the aforementioned issue. We are thinking we are going to need approximately four months to update/build our tools be able to identify the updated Whois output and RDAP output. That would give contracted parties approximately a two-month window for release before the effective. We are planning to add such a date to the documents, unless there is a reason why people think we should not.
Regards,
-- Francisco
I agree with Theo; my understanding was that RDAP profile was a Registry requirement also, not a registrar requirement. Thanks, Jody Kolker -----Original Message----- From: gtld-tech-bounces@icann.org [mailto:gtld-tech-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of gtheo Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 3:56 AM To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight Cc: gTLD-tech@icann.org; Dennis Chang Subject: Re: [gtld-tech] Do not implement before date in CL&D and RDAP profile Hi Francisco, From my understanding on the call this RDAP profile is a Registry requirement right? Least that was the key take away for me from the last session this week. Thank you, Theo Michele Neylon - Blacknight schreef op 2016-07-14 03:23 AM:
This is contrary to how changes are normally implemented and I suspect quite a few of us would have issues with this. These kind of changes are of zero benefit to registrars and are only implemented as a contractual obligation. Imposing further restrictions on when we can implement them has a non-zero impact on us, so I would oppose this
Regards
Michele
Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Hosting & Domains http://www.blacknight.host/ http://www.mneylon.social Sent from mobile so typos and brevity are normal
On 13 Jul 2016, at 21:20, Francisco Arias <francisco.arias@icann.org> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
As you may recall the gTLD RDAP profile and Thick Whois policy implementation – Consistent Labeling and Display (CL&D for short) are synchronized and have a proposed effective date of 1 February 2017. This means enforcement would start on that date. However, in monitoring compliance with a given policy or contractual requirement we also need time to develop our tools and be able to *not* report false compliance issues (e.g., our current tool would raise an issue if it encounters the new Whois output that is specified in CL&D). We need to update that tool to avoid that issue from happening.
We’d like to add to both CL&D and the RDAP profile a “do not implement before” date to avoid the aforementioned issue. We are thinking we are going to need approximately four months to update/build our tools be able to identify the updated Whois output and RDAP output. That would give contracted parties approximately a two-month window for release before the effective. We are planning to add such a date to the documents, unless there is a reason why people think we should not.
Regards,
-- Francisco
Dear colleagues, Apologies for the confusion caused, I wrote "do not implement before" when I meant "do not deploy before" date. In other words, we are proposing to have a date for when this new functionality can be turned on. Contracted parties can, of course, start implementation/development at their convenience. ICANN’s objective for the do not deploy before date is to allow ICANN’s tools to be updated to account for the changes required by CL&D, thus preventing our tools from generating false non-conformance reports during testing and/or monitoring. After discussing this internally, we think we only need this date for the CL&D policy and not for RDAP. As a reminder, the CL&D policy only applies to registries. In summary, we are proposing to have a "do not deploy before" date for the CL&D policy that only applies to registries. Regards, -- Francisco On 7/13/16, 6:23 PM, "Michele Neylon - Blacknight" <michele@blacknight.com> wrote: This is contrary to how changes are normally implemented and I suspect quite a few of us would have issues with this. These kind of changes are of zero benefit to registrars and are only implemented as a contractual obligation. Imposing further restrictions on when we can implement them has a non-zero impact on us, so I would oppose this Regards Michele Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Hosting & Domains http://www.blacknight.host/ http://www.mneylon.social Sent from mobile so typos and brevity are normal > On 13 Jul 2016, at 21:20, Francisco Arias <francisco.arias@icann.org> wrote: > > Dear colleagues, > > As you may recall the gTLD RDAP profile and Thick Whois policy implementation – Consistent Labeling and Display (CL&D for short) are synchronized and have a proposed effective date of 1 February 2017. This means enforcement would start on that date. However, in monitoring compliance with a given policy or contractual requirement we also need time to develop our tools and be able to *not* report false compliance issues (e.g., our current tool would raise an issue if it encounters the new Whois output that is specified in CL&D). We need to update that tool to avoid that issue from happening. > > We’d like to add to both CL&D and the RDAP profile a “do not implement before” date to avoid the aforementioned issue. We are thinking we are going to need approximately four months to update/build our tools be able to identify the updated Whois output and RDAP output. That would give contracted parties approximately a two-month window for release before the effective. We are planning to add such a date to the documents, unless there is a reason why people think we should not. > > Regards, > > -- > Francisco > > > > >
Francisco Thanks for the clarification. That makes a lot more sense Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains http://www.blacknight.host/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ http://ceo.hosting/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 On 21/07/2016, 18:06, "Francisco Arias" <francisco.arias@icann.org> wrote: Dear colleagues, Apologies for the confusion caused, I wrote "do not implement before" when I meant "do not deploy before" date. In other words, we are proposing to have a date for when this new functionality can be turned on. Contracted parties can, of course, start implementation/development at their convenience. ICANN’s objective for the do not deploy before date is to allow ICANN’s tools to be updated to account for the changes required by CL&D, thus preventing our tools from generating false non-conformance reports during testing and/or monitoring. After discussing this internally, we think we only need this date for the CL&D policy and not for RDAP. As a reminder, the CL&D policy only applies to registries. In summary, we are proposing to have a "do not deploy before" date for the CL&D policy that only applies to registries. Regards, -- Francisco On 7/13/16, 6:23 PM, "Michele Neylon - Blacknight" <michele@blacknight.com> wrote: This is contrary to how changes are normally implemented and I suspect quite a few of us would have issues with this. These kind of changes are of zero benefit to registrars and are only implemented as a contractual obligation. Imposing further restrictions on when we can implement them has a non-zero impact on us, so I would oppose this Regards Michele Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Hosting & Domains http://www.blacknight.host/ http://www.mneylon.social Sent from mobile so typos and brevity are normal > On 13 Jul 2016, at 21:20, Francisco Arias <francisco.arias@icann.org> wrote: > > Dear colleagues, > > As you may recall the gTLD RDAP profile and Thick Whois policy implementation – Consistent Labeling and Display (CL&D for short) are synchronized and have a proposed effective date of 1 February 2017. This means enforcement would start on that date. However, in monitoring compliance with a given policy or contractual requirement we also need time to develop our tools and be able to *not* report false compliance issues (e.g., our current tool would raise an issue if it encounters the new Whois output that is specified in CL&D). We need to update that tool to avoid that issue from happening. > > We’d like to add to both CL&D and the RDAP profile a “do not implement before” date to avoid the aforementioned issue. We are thinking we are going to need approximately four months to update/build our tools be able to identify the updated Whois output and RDAP output. That would give contracted parties approximately a two-month window for release before the effective. We are planning to add such a date to the documents, unless there is a reason why people think we should not. > > Regards, > > -- > Francisco > > > > >
Thank you for the clarification Francisco. Cheers, Ben On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Francisco Arias <francisco.arias@icann.org> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Apologies for the confusion caused, I wrote "do not implement before" when I meant "do not deploy before" date. In other words, we are proposing to have a date for when this new functionality can be turned on. Contracted parties can, of course, start implementation/development at their convenience. ICANN’s objective for the do not deploy before date is to allow ICANN’s tools to be updated to account for the changes required by CL&D, thus preventing our tools from generating false non-conformance reports during testing and/or monitoring.
After discussing this internally, we think we only need this date for the CL&D policy and not for RDAP. As a reminder, the CL&D policy only applies to registries.
In summary, we are proposing to have a "do not deploy before" date for the CL&D policy that only applies to registries.
Regards,
-- Francisco
On 7/13/16, 6:23 PM, "Michele Neylon - Blacknight" <michele@blacknight.com> wrote:
This is contrary to how changes are normally implemented and I suspect quite a few of us would have issues with this. These kind of changes are of zero benefit to registrars and are only implemented as a contractual obligation. Imposing further restrictions on when we can implement them has a non-zero impact on us, so I would oppose this
Regards
Michele
Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Hosting & Domains http://www.blacknight.host/ http://www.mneylon.social Sent from mobile so typos and brevity are normal
> On 13 Jul 2016, at 21:20, Francisco Arias <francisco.arias@icann.org> wrote: > > Dear colleagues, > > As you may recall the gTLD RDAP profile and Thick Whois policy implementation – Consistent Labeling and Display (CL&D for short) are synchronized and have a proposed effective date of 1 February 2017. This means enforcement would start on that date. However, in monitoring compliance with a given policy or contractual requirement we also need time to develop our tools and be able to *not* report false compliance issues (e.g., our current tool would raise an issue if it encounters the new Whois output that is specified in CL&D). We need to update that tool to avoid that issue from happening. > > We’d like to add to both CL&D and the RDAP profile a “do not implement before” date to avoid the aforementioned issue. We are thinking we are going to need approximately four months to update/build our tools be able to identify the updated Whois output and RDAP output. That would give contracted parties approximately a two-month window for release before the effective. We are planning to add such a date to the documents, unless there is a reason why people think we should not. > > Regards, > > -- > Francisco > > > > >
-- Benoit Levac VP Engineering, Registry Platform[image: Rightside] <http://www.rightside.co/>*Office* | 425-298-2337 *Mobile* | 613-617-4416 benoit.levac@rightside.co www.rightside.co
However, in monitoring compliance with a given policy or contractual requirement we also need time to develop our tools and be able to *not* report false compliance issues (e.g., our current tool would raise an issue if it encounters the new Whois output that is specified in CL&D). We need to update that tool to avoid that issue from happening.
You're supposed to be checking them manually before submitting them to Registars anyway, so the availability of your "tool" is something that impacts ICANN not somthing that should be imposing specific timescales on Registars. Rob
Francisco,. I have a few questions regarding your email before I can express an opinion as to whether the dates should be added or not to the documents. 1 - I don't recall seeing a proposed effective date of February 1st 2017 on the RDAP profile discussions, or anywhere else. When was this date announced? 2 - According to a note on page 15 of the latest red line of the RDAP profile, "Thick Whois Policy that covers the transition of .com, .jobs and .net gTLDs from thin to thick Whois will define an implementation date for Registrars to offer an RDAP service for registrations under these TLDs." . By adding the February 1st 2017 date to the CL&D (Thick Whois Policy), I want to confirm whether that includes registrar WHOIS for .COM, .NET and .JOB per the comment in the RDAP Profile, or whether those are separate dates. 3 - By "do not implement before date", do you mean the date by when Registries and Registrars have to comply with the 2 mentioned policies? If so, isn't it more of a "MUST implement by" date? I assume that is the date when you would start monitoring for compliance? 4 - When you say you will need 4 months to implement your RDDS monitoring, do you mean from now? From February 1st 2017? I'm not sure I understand how that gives us 2 months. 2 months from what date? 5 - To be clear, what would be our final compliance date to have RDAP service fully operational per the RDAP profile? Thank you. Ben On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Francisco Arias <francisco.arias@icann.org> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
As you may recall the gTLD RDAP profile and Thick Whois policy implementation – Consistent Labeling and Display (CL&D for short) are synchronized and have a proposed effective date of 1 February 2017. This means enforcement would start on that date. However, in monitoring compliance with a given policy or contractual requirement we also need time to develop our tools and be able to *not* report false compliance issues (e.g., our current tool would raise an issue if it encounters the new Whois output that is specified in CL&D). We need to update that tool to avoid that issue from happening.
We’d like to add to both CL&D and the RDAP profile a “do not implement before” date to avoid the aforementioned issue. We are thinking we are going to need approximately four months to update/build our tools be able to identify the updated Whois output and RDAP output. That would give contracted parties approximately a two-month window for release before the effective. We are planning to add such a date to the documents, unless there is a reason why people think we should not.
Regards,
-- Francisco
-- Benoit Levac VP Engineering, Registry Platform[image: Rightside] <http://www.rightside.co/>*Office* | 425-298-2337 *Mobile* | 613-617-4416 benoit.levac@rightside.co www.rightside.co
Hi Ben, The 1-Feb-2017 date has been discussed in the Implementation Review Team of the Thick Whois policy and other presentations in ICANN and other events. Registrations under .com, .jobs, and .net (the only thin gTLD registries), both in the registry and registrar side, are not required to be offered, but may be offered over RDAP according to the gTLD RDAP profile. They are expected to be required in the upcoming policy for the transition from thin to thick. I think I covered questions 3 and 4 below with my other email. If not, please let me know. The final date by which RDAP would have to be operational would be 1-Feb-2017. We expect to publish the final version of the profile and send the formal notices to contracted parties early next week. Regards, -- Francisco On 7/19/16, 9:21 AM, "Benoit Levac" <benoit.levac@rightside.co<mailto:benoit.levac@rightside.co>> wrote: Francisco,. I have a few questions regarding your email before I can express an opinion as to whether the dates should be added or not to the documents. 1 - I don't recall seeing a proposed effective date of February 1st 2017 on the RDAP profile discussions, or anywhere else. When was this date announced? 2 - According to a note on page 15 of the latest red line of the RDAP profile, "Thick Whois Policy that covers the transition of .com, .jobs and .net gTLDs from thin to thick Whois will define an implementation date for Registrars to offer an RDAP service for registrations under these TLDs." . By adding the February 1st 2017 date to the CL&D (Thick Whois Policy), I want to confirm whether that includes registrar WHOIS for .COM, .NET and .JOB per the comment in the RDAP Profile, or whether those are separate dates. 3 - By "do not implement before date", do you mean the date by when Registries and Registrars have to comply with the 2 mentioned policies? If so, isn't it more of a "MUST implement by" date? I assume that is the date when you would start monitoring for compliance? 4 - When you say you will need 4 months to implement your RDDS monitoring, do you mean from now? From February 1st 2017? I'm not sure I understand how that gives us 2 months. 2 months from what date? 5 - To be clear, what would be our final compliance date to have RDAP service fully operational per the RDAP profile? Thank you. Ben On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Francisco Arias <francisco.arias@icann.org<mailto:francisco.arias@icann.org>> wrote: Dear colleagues, As you may recall the gTLD RDAP profile and Thick Whois policy implementation – Consistent Labeling and Display (CL&D for short) are synchronized and have a proposed effective date of 1 February 2017. This means enforcement would start on that date. However, in monitoring compliance with a given policy or contractual requirement we also need time to develop our tools and be able to *not* report false compliance issues (e.g., our current tool would raise an issue if it encounters the new Whois output that is specified in CL&D). We need to update that tool to avoid that issue from happening. We’d like to add to both CL&D and the RDAP profile a “do not implement before” date to avoid the aforementioned issue. We are thinking we are going to need approximately four months to update/build our tools be able to identify the updated Whois output and RDAP output. That would give contracted parties approximately a two-month window for release before the effective. We are planning to add such a date to the documents, unless there is a reason why people think we should not. Regards, -- Francisco -- Benoit Levac VP Engineering, Registry Platform [mage removed by sender. Rightside]<http://www.rightside.co/> Office | 425-298-2337 Mobile | 613-617-4416 benoit.levac@rightside.co<mailto:benoit.levac@rightside.co> www.rightside.co<http://www.rightside.co>
participants (6)
-
Benoit Levac -
Francisco Arias -
gtheo -
Jody Kolker -
Michele Neylon - Blacknight -
Rob Golding