[council] WG Reports for IRTP Part B and PEDNR
- To: "GNSO Council " <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [council] WG Reports for IRTP Part B and PEDNR
- From: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:23:59 -0700
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Reply-to: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Web-Based Email 5.1.10
IRTP Part B WG
Michele Nylon was selected as Chair of the WG and the Council will
confirm the selection 3 Sept.
We have had two calls and work on the list:
-- We discussed background around the issues.
-- Discussed and worked definitions. This is still ongoing.
-- Discussed the two SSAC reports with help from Dave Piscatelo. The
first was produced in 2005 and dealt with suggestions for a process for
urgent return and resolution of a domain name after a fraudulent
transfer. The second report deals with protecting domain names agains
exploitation or misuse and focuses on high profile domains.
-- Working on the Public Comment Announcement and Constituency Statement
-- Planned a F2F for Monday at 7am in in Seoul.
-- Next call is 15 September 2009.
The questions posed in the charter have been submitted for public
comment until 10 Sept. The WG has also sent requests for each
constituency to respond.
-- In response to the request for Staff to provide information on how
current policies on expired names are enforced William McKelligott,
ICANN Auditor for the Contractual Compliance Team provided this summary
of a recent audit:
"ICANN Compliance recently completed an audit of all registrar websites
to establish if they were compliant with the Expired Domain Deletion
Policy as it relates to fees charged to registered name holders for
recovering domain names that have entered the Redemption Grace Period
(RGP) (please refer to section 184.108.40.206 of the EDDP). A large number or
registrars- close to 500 of them- posted information on their websites
in relation to recovering domain names that are in RGP which either
either did not mention fees or mentioned them but did not specify any
amount (e.g., “fees will apply”).
The EDDP requires registrars to post on their website the actual fees
charged to registered name holders for recovering domain names that are
in RGP. Compliance will be posting an advisory and reaching out to
registrars in the very near future to clarify this requirement."
Link to the full report:
-- Discussed other data that might be helpful.
-- Formed a Data Collection Sub-Team. It was scheduled to meet Wednesday
but I believe that was postponed.
-- Reviewed what further information / discussion is required to fulfil
following requirements of PEDNR charter, such as current Registrar
-- Began review of Charter Question 1 - Whether adequate opportunity
exists for registrants to redeem their expired domain names. Questions
were raised as to how to define what is adequate.
-- Ongoing discussion on how to collect data to support scope of
-- Next call is 8 September 2009.