[LAC-Discuss] ICANN Announcement: Registrar Accreditation Policy and Process Must Be Reviewed
Nick Ashton-Hart
nick.ashton-hart at icann.org
Wed Mar 21 15:16:50 EDT 2007
The announcement below should be of interest in the context of the
resolution being discussed by the community. The link to this item is
at http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-21mar07.htm.
The list of questions may incorporate some questions which would be
worthy of cross-incorporation into the resolution of the community -
just a thought.
---
Registrar Accreditation Policy and Process Must be Reviewed
21 March 2007
President and CEO of ICANN, Dr Paul Twomey today called for major
review of ICANN’s Registrar Accreditation Agreements (RAA) and the
Accreditation process.
“What has happened to registrants with RegisterFly.com has made it
clear there must be comprehensive review of the registrar
accreditation process and the content of the RAA” he said. “This is
going to be a key debate at our Lisbon meeting scheduled for 26 - 30
March 2007. There must be clear decisions made on changes. As a
community we cannot put this off.”
“ICANN introduced competition to the domain name market in 1998. Back
then there was one registrar. There are now over 865. That’s a good
thing because it has made domain names cheaper and offered more
choice. But the RAA was designed and signed when the domain name
market was much smaller. The market now supports about 70 million
generic TLD names and is growing.” Dr Twomey said.
“Registrants suffer most from weaknesses in the RAA and I want to
make sure that ICANN’s accreditation process and our agreement gives
us the ability to respond more strongly and flexibly in the future”
he said.
“What is presently happening with RegisterFly makes it clear that
there are also some problems with proxy registrations. Specifically,
proxy registrations are available as a choice, but people who have
them have great difficulties getting access to their data and having
their domain name transferred where a registrar is uncooperative or
has other problems with transfer. ICANN has had difficulty accessing
this data too,” Dr Twomey said.
“We need to expedite data escrow. There has been a long and detailed
discussion and much interaction between ICANN staff and registrars on
this issue. But we need to reach a conclusion. Recent events and the
Lisbon meeting present that opportunity. There are resource
implications and useage rules that need to be discussed among the
ICANN community. I look forward to the continuing efforts and
collaboration of registrars with ICANN in that regard ” he said.
“Registrants clearly want ICANN to have more capacity to access data
on their behalf if there are significant problems with their
registrar. There is a need for better enforcement mechanisms and an
ability for ICANN to intervene more quickly if a registrar fails or
is engaged in damaging business practice” he added.
“There’s also no way that registrants can measure the performance of
registrars in any independent comparative way. That should be
encouraged” Dr Twomey said.
“The vast majority of ICANN’s accredited registrars offer high levels
of service and integrity. But as we have seen, there is the risk that
poorly performing registrars can hurt registrants very significantly.
If the domain name industry wants to remain community self –
regulating as it has been until now we need to put in place further
sensible and practical measures to protect registrants” he noted.
Dr Twomey said he would like to see the following issues included in
any discussion:
Purpose of Register Accreditation Policy and Agreement
What is the primary purpose of the Registration Accreditation
Agreement? Is it a compliance tool? If so how can it be strengthened
to protect registrants?
Rating of Registrars
How should ICANN and/or the registrar constituency encourage a
system that rates registrars according to customer service and
performance and should this be available to registrants?
Affiliated Registrars / Group ownership
Affiliated registrars have common ownership or control. What is
the best mechanism for ICANN to hold affiliated registrars
accountable for an affiliate’s actions?
Additional compliance enforcement tools
Stronger compliance tools need to be included in any reform to
the RAA. What are those tools? Do they encompass liquidated damages?
Should registrars be able to be suspended more readily? Are there
other options? What are the mechanisms that allow such options to be
enforced quickly?
Transfer policy
What elements of the transfer policy need to be reformed? Should
registrants have an alternative to their current registrar for the
issuing of authcodes and the unlocking of them? Should ICANN or
another entity be able to do this?
Registrar operator skill testing
How is it possible to assess registrar skills and to train
registrars to a common standard of performance upon which registrants
can rely?
Accreditation by purchase
It is possible for companies to ‘avoid’ accreditation
application process by buying a registrar. How can abuse of this
loophole be stopped?
Proxy registrations
There needs to be an examination of proxy registrations in light
of difficulties faced in registrar data recovery. What is the balance
between privacy and disclosure?
Reseller liability under RAA
What tools are needed to ensure better accountability by
resellers to registrants?
Registrar data escrow
What data needs to be escrowed? If implementation needs to move
faster, greater resource allocation is required. What level of
resourcing is necessary?
Clarification of ICANN's responsibilities and the options available
to registrants
ICANN recently posted a guide for registrants on its website but
additional consumer options (outside ICANN) should be identified for
and provided to registrants. Is there a need for a new entity to
assist customers and intervene on behalf of their concerns?
“All ICANN stakeholders need to be involved in this debate. But in
particular I would like to see registrars and registrants actively
engaged in the discussion,” Dr Twomey said. “It is in their interests
to make sure that poor practice is driven from the process and that
the protection of registrants is increased.”
More information about the lac-discuss-en
mailing list