someone suggested that as a way to transition from rrp to epp. apparently the .org transition caused glitches in the transfer process because some transfers were being done via auth codes, and others were not. So, this would be more applicable for com/net, I guess. The idea would be not to use auth codes until all registrars were transitioned, so that you would not impede transfers when one registrar was on one standard and another on another one. Elana Broitman Register.com 575 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 Phone (212) 798-9215
EFax (800) 886-2716 Fax (212) 629-9309 ebroitman@register.com
-----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org]On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 10:40 AM To: Elana Broitman; registrars@dnso.org Subject: RE: [registrars] EPP transfer Sorry I missed the call. I was time zone challenged last week. I do have one question. What is the reason behind the registries not requiring auth codes until the transition is done? That would mean I'll have to have my transfer process changed (UI and backend) to accommodate that. Many customers are accustomed to that now and may be confused. So what is the benefit of doing that? Tim -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Elana Broitman Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 7:28 AM To: registrars@dnso.org Subject: [registrars] EPP transfer Hi all - last Thursday we had a registrars only call to discuss our "wish list" to send to the registries with regard to EPP transition. The conversation included more generally the question of registry-registrar relations and we came up with a somewhat broader list. I would like to communicate it now to the registries. Please see below and send me any comments today. I will send the final list to the registries tomorrow. * com/net registries should remain thin after transition; * registries should conduct an OT&E environment prior to initiating a transition period * registries should sync up their business rules as much as possible (e.g., whois fields) * a 3rd party should validate that the registries have synced the rules prior to initiating a transition period * transition processes should be the same or as similar as possible * RRP-EPP transitions should allow for legacy registrations until transitions are completed and checked in order not to turn off registration/renewals * the transition should be as long as possible, at least through Q1 2005 * com/net transition should allow for an additional year beyond BONI * the registries should not require auth codes for transfers until all transition periods are done * an implementation committee that includes registrars should be established * there should be a standardization of maintenance notices and other types of notices and reports * registrars should be able to electronically query registries about their balances * registries should provide a list of recommended developers for reference by registrars that need consultants Elana Broitman Register.com 575 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 Phone (212) 798-9215
EFax (800) 886-2716 Fax (212) 629-9309 ebroitman@register.com
On 5/17/2004 10:53 AM Elana Broitman noted that:
someone suggested that as a way to transition from rrp to epp.
I'd like to toss another suggestion into the mix... "1. That no existing EPP registry shall be required to upgrade to EPP until such time that .com and .net are both operating on EPP." Here's why... All of the other registries are already operating with some flavor of EPP and all interested registrars have already undertaken an integration with those registries. .com and .net are the last two that Registrars are really concerned with. While it would be nice to have .biz and .info running precisely the same flavor of EPP, not having this isn't going to kill anyone. On the other hand, Verisign's implementation of EPP might. I'd prefer that Registrars get a chance to focus on the intricacies that will be associated with the .com and .net migrations without the distraction of anything else going on. This will also give the other registry operators the luxury of having some time to react to any business policy changes that Verisign might require as part of the migration. At the end of the day, business policy interoperability is probably more important to Registrars than technical interoperability between Registrars and I think we would all benefit from being able to focus on doing the hard work first (.com and .net) followed by the easier ones.... -- -rwr "Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions. All life is an experiment. The more experiments you make the better." - Ralph Waldo Emerson Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
"1. That no existing EPP registry shall be required to upgrade to EPP until such time that .com and .net are both operating on EPP."
Actually, I think it should be the other way around. The EPP syntaxes used by .INFO, .BIZ, .NAME and .ORG are quite diverse (especially .INFO). I would like to see the "easy" upgrades of the existing EPP Registries before dealing with .NET or .COM. IMHO, Mike Lampson The Registry at Info Avenue, LLC -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org]On Behalf Of Ross Wm Rader Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 11:02 AM To: Elana Broitman Cc: registrars@dnso.org Subject: Re: [registrars] EPP transfer On 5/17/2004 10:53 AM Elana Broitman noted that:
someone suggested that as a way to transition from rrp to epp.
I'd like to toss another suggestion into the mix... "1. That no existing EPP registry shall be required to upgrade to EPP until such time that .com and .net are both operating on EPP." Here's why... All of the other registries are already operating with some flavor of EPP and all interested registrars have already undertaken an integration with those registries. .com and .net are the last two that Registrars are really concerned with. While it would be nice to have .biz and .info running precisely the same flavor of EPP, not having this isn't going to kill anyone. On the other hand, Verisign's implementation of EPP might. I'd prefer that Registrars get a chance to focus on the intricacies that will be associated with the .com and .net migrations without the distraction of anything else going on. This will also give the other registry operators the luxury of having some time to react to any business policy changes that Verisign might require as part of the migration. At the end of the day, business policy interoperability is probably more important to Registrars than technical interoperability between Registrars and I think we would all benefit from being able to focus on doing the hard work first (.com and .net) followed by the easier ones.... -- -rwr "Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions. All life is an experiment. The more experiments you make the better." - Ralph Waldo Emerson Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
I would disagree. Upgrading from one verion of EPP to another would be a waste of time and money unless there were guarantees that it would result in a standard across all registries. I would support not doing anything until Verisign decides what version of EPP they plan to support and when. Best Regards, Tom -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lampson Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 12:06 PM To: registrars@dnso.org Subject: RE: [registrars] EPP transfer
"1. That no existing EPP registry shall be required to upgrade to EPP until such time that .com and .net are both operating on EPP."
Actually, I think it should be the other way around. The EPP syntaxes used by .INFO, .BIZ, .NAME and .ORG are quite diverse (especially .INFO). I would like to see the "easy" upgrades of the existing EPP Registries before dealing with .NET or .COM. IMHO, Mike Lampson The Registry at Info Avenue, LLC -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org]On Behalf Of Ross Wm Rader Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 11:02 AM To: Elana Broitman Cc: registrars@dnso.org Subject: Re: [registrars] EPP transfer On 5/17/2004 10:53 AM Elana Broitman noted that:
someone suggested that as a way to transition from rrp to epp.
I'd like to toss another suggestion into the mix... "1. That no existing EPP registry shall be required to upgrade to EPP until such time that .com and .net are both operating on EPP." Here's why... All of the other registries are already operating with some flavor of EPP and all interested registrars have already undertaken an integration with those registries. .com and .net are the last two that Registrars are really concerned with. While it would be nice to have .biz and .info running precisely the same flavor of EPP, not having this isn't going to kill anyone. On the other hand, Verisign's implementation of EPP might. I'd prefer that Registrars get a chance to focus on the intricacies that will be associated with the .com and .net migrations without the distraction of anything else going on. This will also give the other registry operators the luxury of having some time to react to any business policy changes that Verisign might require as part of the migration. At the end of the day, business policy interoperability is probably more important to Registrars than technical interoperability between Registrars and I think we would all benefit from being able to focus on doing the hard work first (.com and .net) followed by the easier ones.... -- -rwr "Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions. All life is an experiment. The more experiments you make the better." - Ralph Waldo Emerson Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
On 5/17/2004 12:56 PM tbarrett noted that:
I would disagree. Upgrading from one verion of EPP to another would be a waste of time and money unless there were guarantees that it would result in a standard across all registries.
I would support not doing anything until Verisign decides what version of EPP they plan to support and when.
Yeah - I guess I would summarize my goal with an analogy. We want the registries to all speak french. Let's get them speaking french first and worry about their accents later...not much later, but a little bit later...;-) -- -rwr "Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions. All life is an experiment. The more experiments you make the better." - Ralph Waldo Emerson Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
Je suis tout a fait d'accord with Ross :-) Let's speak french from now on. More seriously, I tend to agree with Ross as we already have the EPP in place for all the registries, we are missing only .com/.net and would be nice to see our Verisign will be implemented their EPP before to make everybody speaking the seme accent...otherwise we will miss a big palyer... we will request to the other registries things we don't know yet while when Verisign will be in place it will be easier to make a cross reference amongst all the TLDs. Jean-Miche; Ross Wm. Rader wrote:
On 5/17/2004 12:56 PM tbarrett noted that:
I would disagree. Upgrading from one verion of EPP to another would be a waste of time and money unless there were guarantees that it would result in a standard across all registries.
I would support not doing anything until Verisign decides what version of EPP they plan to support and when.
Yeah - I guess I would summarize my goal with an analogy. We want the registries to all speak french. Let's get them speaking french first and worry about their accents later...not much later, but a little bit later...;-)
Agreed! Monte Cahn Founder/CEO Monte@Moniker.com Monte@DomainSystems.com O - 954-984-8445 F - 954-969-9155 Moniker.com - ICANN Accredited Corporate Domain Management Services DomainSystems.com - Domain Sales & After-market Services CoolHandle.com - World Class Hosting and Email Solutions -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of tbarrett Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 12:56 PM To: 'Mike Lampson'; registrars@dnso.org Subject: RE: [registrars] EPP transfer I would disagree. Upgrading from one verion of EPP to another would be a waste of time and money unless there were guarantees that it would result in a standard across all registries. I would support not doing anything until Verisign decides what version of EPP they plan to support and when. Best Regards, Tom -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lampson Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 12:06 PM To: registrars@dnso.org Subject: RE: [registrars] EPP transfer
"1. That no existing EPP registry shall be required to upgrade to EPP until such time that .com and .net are both operating on EPP."
Actually, I think it should be the other way around. The EPP syntaxes used by .INFO, .BIZ, .NAME and .ORG are quite diverse (especially .INFO). I would like to see the "easy" upgrades of the existing EPP Registries before dealing with .NET or .COM. IMHO, Mike Lampson The Registry at Info Avenue, LLC -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org]On Behalf Of Ross Wm Rader Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 11:02 AM To: Elana Broitman Cc: registrars@dnso.org Subject: Re: [registrars] EPP transfer On 5/17/2004 10:53 AM Elana Broitman noted that:
someone suggested that as a way to transition from rrp to epp.
I'd like to toss another suggestion into the mix... "1. That no existing EPP registry shall be required to upgrade to EPP until such time that .com and .net are both operating on EPP." Here's why... All of the other registries are already operating with some flavor of EPP and all interested registrars have already undertaken an integration with those registries. .com and .net are the last two that Registrars are really concerned with. While it would be nice to have .biz and .info running precisely the same flavor of EPP, not having this isn't going to kill anyone. On the other hand, Verisign's implementation of EPP might. I'd prefer that Registrars get a chance to focus on the intricacies that will be associated with the .com and .net migrations without the distraction of anything else going on. This will also give the other registry operators the luxury of having some time to react to any business policy changes that Verisign might require as part of the migration. At the end of the day, business policy interoperability is probably more important to Registrars than technical interoperability between Registrars and I think we would all benefit from being able to focus on doing the hard work first (.com and .net) followed by the easier ones.... -- -rwr "Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions. All life is an experiment. The more experiments you make the better." - Ralph Waldo Emerson Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
more applicable for com/net,
Ah, that makes more sense. Thanks, Tim -----Original Message----- From: Elana Broitman [mailto:ebroitman@register.com] Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 8:53 AM To: Tim Ruiz; registrars@dnso.org Subject: RE: [registrars] EPP transfer someone suggested that as a way to transition from rrp to epp. apparently the .org transition caused glitches in the transfer process because some transfers were being done via auth codes, and others were not. So, this would be more applicable for com/net, I guess. The idea would be not to use auth codes until all registrars were transitioned, so that you would not impede transfers when one registrar was on one standard and another on another one. Elana Broitman Register.com 575 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 Phone (212) 798-9215
EFax (800) 886-2716 Fax (212) 629-9309 ebroitman@register.com
-----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org]On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 10:40 AM To: Elana Broitman; registrars@dnso.org Subject: RE: [registrars] EPP transfer Sorry I missed the call. I was time zone challenged last week. I do have one question. What is the reason behind the registries not requiring auth codes until the transition is done? That would mean I'll have to have my transfer process changed (UI and backend) to accommodate that. Many customers are accustomed to that now and may be confused. So what is the benefit of doing that? Tim -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Elana Broitman Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 7:28 AM To: registrars@dnso.org Subject: [registrars] EPP transfer Hi all - last Thursday we had a registrars only call to discuss our "wish list" to send to the registries with regard to EPP transition. The conversation included more generally the question of registry-registrar relations and we came up with a somewhat broader list. I would like to communicate it now to the registries. Please see below and send me any comments today. I will send the final list to the registries tomorrow. * com/net registries should remain thin after transition; * registries should conduct an OT&E environment prior to initiating a transition period * registries should sync up their business rules as much as possible (e.g., whois fields) * a 3rd party should validate that the registries have synced the rules prior to initiating a transition period * transition processes should be the same or as similar as possible * RRP-EPP transitions should allow for legacy registrations until transitions are completed and checked in order not to turn off registration/renewals * the transition should be as long as possible, at least through Q1 2005 * com/net transition should allow for an additional year beyond BONI * the registries should not require auth codes for transfers until all transition periods are done * an implementation committee that includes registrars should be established * there should be a standardization of maintenance notices and other types of notices and reports * registrars should be able to electronically query registries about their balances * registries should provide a list of recommended developers for reference by registrars that need consultants Elana Broitman Register.com 575 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 Phone (212) 798-9215
EFax (800) 886-2716 Fax (212) 629-9309 ebroitman@register.com
participants (7)
-
Elana Broitman -
Jean-Michel Becar -
Mike Lampson -
Monte Cahn -
Ross Wm. Rader -
tbarrett -
Tim Ruiz