Protections for Registrants - A Summary
Overview
Recent events in the gTLD name space demonstrate that procedural and
contractual protections for registrants must be implemented.
The five major issues are:
- The increase in numbers of gTLD registrars increase the likelihood of registrar failure
- The anticipated consensus policy for delegating new gTLDs make a registry failure inevitable
- The seven-year-old registrar accreditation agreement does not address market developments
- The recent expansion in domain name registrations, registries,
registrars and their associated business models require a proactive
contractual compliance program
The program to protect registrants can be described by five separate efforts, some of which overlap.
- Registrar data escrow
- Proposed amendments to the registrars’ accreditation agreement (RAA)
- Registry failover
- Contractual compliance
- Process for transfer of names in the event of registrar de-accreditation
Issue 1 – Registrar Data Escrow
Three milestones nearing completion by ICANN staff:
- Published an escrow specifications document
- Issued a Request for Proposals for retention of an escrow service
provider. Seven applications were received; two are being considered.
- Drafted an application to be used by prospective third party
providers of escrow services. Draft is still being reviewed, but is
scheduled for publication with the announcement of the selection of the
data escrow provider.
Nearly 100% of gTLD registrars are expected to begin escrowing data by the close of 2007.
Staff is also working to resolve the added challenge created by the use
of Whois privacy and proxy services through amendment of the Registrar
Accreditation Agreement.
Issue 2 – Process for Amending the Registrar Accreditation Agreement
The current agreement with 900 registrars has not been changed for more than seven years because:
- Changes can only be made through the consensus-based process of a supporting organization.
- Changes are made so rarely that there is a reluctance to move
forward due to a concern that important issues will be missed and
therefore left unaddressed for many years.
The new process being suggested would streamline changes (still with
supporting organisation endorsement) and make RAA review a regularly
scheduled process so that issues missed in one round could be
considered in a relatively short time frame.
The streamlined process is not intended to obviate the need for a
policy development process. If the new procedure is not effective, as
determined by the ICANN constituencies and community, a PDP on the
agreement could be undertaken.
Issue 3 – Registry Failover
Triggered by the introduction of several new sTLDs and the expected
designation of many new gTLDs through the anticipated GNSO consensus
policy. The program for addressing these issues has published key
documents describing work that will contribute to the implementation of
a registry failover program.
- Several well-developed registries have implemented competent
contingency plans. ICANN will build on that work to create a best
practices document to be adopted by new TLDs or included in the new
registry agreements.
- The core issue is defining ICANN’s role in the event of a registry
failure. Each registry must have a contingency plan to maintain
registry operations for a period of time so that:
- A replacement operator or sponsor can be found and a transfer effected, or
- Provide a notice period to registrants that the registry is closing.
Other questions and potential solutions to be discussed: To what
extent should names be perpetual and what is ICANN’s role in ensuring
registry operations?
Issue 4 – Contractual Compliance
Significant work completed this year:
- Publishing and executing a program plan and executing according to
schedule that includes a staffing and operational plan. Several
proactive audits were completed and the next set of audits is planned.
- These audits produced many warning and breach letters to
registrars, many of whom are now in compliance. Past due payables have
been drastically reduced. Other areas of contractual compliance can
also be considered and prosecuted.
Issue 5 – De-accreditation Process
A detailed process is needed for the timing and steps to transfer
names from a de-accredited registrar to one with ongoing operations.
ICANN published a procedure to appoint a service provider to transfer
names from the de-accredited party to a registrar of the registrant’s
choosing.
Several questions have been raised regarding implementation details. An
exercise should be undertaken to develop a process and test it through
simulation. A different, market based approach may be the best approach
to determining a “gaining” registrar.
This work is to be done in the first half of fiscal year 2007–08.
Here is the direct Link to the meeting page in San Juan: http://sanjuan2007.icann.org/node/24
Your comments on this meeting and participation are important.
|
Would you be open to hosting a FORUM ... of and on Here?
