[ALAC] Fwd: [gnso-irtpd] For your review - Draft Final Report

Dev Anand Teelucksingh admin at ttcsweb.org
Thu Sep 11 17:40:57 UTC 2014

Hello Holly,

Perhaps it is just me, but I didn't see an attachment of the latest version
of the Final Report of IRTP Part D

Dev Anand

On 10 September 2014 18:34, Holly Raiche <h.raiche at internode.on.net> wrote:

> Hi Everyone
> This Working Group - Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy - D is finalising its
> final report.  The policy concerns the processes that must be followed in
> transferring from one registrar to another - with this part of the WG
> concentrating on specific issues.  Alan and I have been on the working
> group and the issues involving registrants - what we have focussed on are
> as follows:
> In a previous IRTP WG, one of its recommendations was that the dispute
> options for registrants be developed for transfers - o include them in the
> current TDRP process.  After a lot of discussion, this WG decided that it
> would be too complex and, because the current policy (if expanded to
> include registrants) would open registrants to risk since the existing TDRP
> processes are costly and the losing party pays.  The difficulty for
> registrants is that the TDRP process must be initiated by registrars - who
> may not want to take up a disputed transfer on behalf of the registrant.
> What the WG decided, instead, was to provide better, more comprehensible
> information accessible to registrants on transfer processes - thus letting
> registrants who dispute a transfer understand if the transfer is against
> ICANN policies and processes, and then go to ICANN Compliance, having
> Compliance take action.  So recommendations in this report recommends that
> clear understandable information be on the ICANN webs site and that links
> to that information are on registrars and resellers websites. (the report
> is politely critical of what is on the ICANN website now).
> Other recommendations of interest is that outcomes of the TDRP are
> publicly available - not only for the industry but so registrants can find
> information about decisions on transfer disputes.
> It’s a long read, but the summary is helpful.
> And and all feedback welcome to Alan or me since we are finalising the
> report so that it can be voted on at the LA meeting
> Holly
> Begin forwarded message:
> > From: Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann at icann.org>
> > Subject: [gnso-irtpd] For your review - Draft Final Report
> > Date: 11 September 2014 5:48:26 am AEST
> > To: "gnso-irtpd at icann.org" <gnso-irtpd at icann.org>
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > Please find attached the latest version of the Final Report. Changes to
> the last version are redlined. Please see especially pages 16, 18, 20, 24,
> 26, and 28 – where the Group addressed the GDD comments during our last
> call.
> Whether dispute options for registrants should be developed and
> implemented as part of the policy (registrants currently depend on
> registrars to initiate a dispute on t
> >
> > Please note that we are approaching fast the LA submission deadline: 22
> September 2014.
> >
> > Based on the discussion during the last calls, the assumption is that
> there is consensus among the Group for all recommendations as they
> currently stand, meaning we anticipate only minor non-substaitve edits from
> here on out. If you do not agree with this statement and/or plan to submit
> a minority statement, please indicate this on the list or, at the latest,
> during our next meeting, Monday 15 September.
> >
> > Many thanks and best wishes,
> > Lars
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)

More information about the ALAC mailing list