On Tue, 1 Dec 2009, Milton L Mueller wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> Process
>>
>>      * Please identify the members of your constituency who participated
>> in
>> developing the perspective(s) set forth below.?
>>
>>
>> Ron Wickersham drafted the response.
>> Reviewed by NCUC Executive committee.
>
> I think you can say also, "reviewed by the membership"

yes.  the original deadline was 6 Oct and with the extra time we have
indeed added the membership in the discussion.

>>      * Please describe the process by which your constituency arrived at
>> the
>> perspective(s) set forth below.
>>
>> Notice of PEDNR WG was posted on the NCUC wiki for volunteers.
>> The NCUC mailing list solicited volunteers and comments from members.
>> Progress of PENDR WG was discussed briefly on two NCUC teleconferences.

and add "Discussed on the NCUC listserv."

>> Questions
>>
>> Please provide your constituency?s views on:
>>
>>     1. Whether adequate opportunity exists for registrants to redeem their
>> expired domain names;
>>
>> Current ICANN policies endeavor to assure that expired domain names can
>> be redeemed.  However, due to the complex array of registrars, and
>> expecially
>> resellers, these ICANN policies are not as effective as envisioned.
>>
>> On the narrow question of "opportunity" it is likely that a timely request
>> for restoration of an expired domain name is honored.
>>
>> But there is a broader aspect which is that the registrant may be offered
>> no information or incomplete information from the reseller or registrar
>> handling the domain, and the policies vary widely.
>>
>>
>>     2. Whether expiration-related provisions in typical registration
>> agreements
>> are clear and conspicuous enough;
>>
>> While "typical" registration agreements (especially for the larger
>> registrars) are good, it is not the case that every registrant receives
>> a registration agreement.
>>
>> Process are in place to assure that the Registries handle every domain in
>> a uniform manner.   Expiration issues should be equally uniform, and not
>> be considered in the realm of "competitive" variations.
>>
>> In matters of this type, education of the Registrant has been suggested
>> as the solution.  NCUC believes that education can only suceed if the
>> policies around expiration are identical from any registrar or reseller.
>
> Good point.
>
>> Therefore the PEDNR WG would fulfill its mission if ICANN established
>> minimum policies to be set out for notification when domains approach
>> expiration, for procedures to be followed if the registration is not
>> renewed (so that DNS changes at expiration uniformly regardless of
>> registrar or reseller), and notification for restoring an expired domain
>> name is uniform.
>>
>>
>>     3. Whether adequate notice exists to alert registrants of upcoming
>> expirations;
>>
>> Most registrars provide adequate notice.
>>
>>
>>     4. Whether additional measures need to be implemented to indicate that
>> once a domain name enters the Auto-Renew Grace Period, it has expired
>> (e.g., hold status, a notice on the site with a link to information on
>> how to renew, or other options to be determined);
>>
>> NCUC finds that whois information on expiration is confusing for
>> registrants due to auto-renew.   It would be ideal to eliminate the
>> use of the identical term at the registry whois and the registrar or
>> reseller whois to indicate the status of the domain.
>
>
> I do not understand what you mean by "identical term" here.

on a "thin" whois, information is partially supplied by the registry
and partially by the registrar.    for instance, here are the dates
on a .com domain as reported by the registry:

    Updated Date: 28-nov-2009
    Creation Date: 26-nov-2006
    Expiration Date: 26-nov-2010

and by the registrar (with variations from different registrars):

reg_created: 2006-11-27 04:49:21
expires: 2010-11-27 04:49:21
created: 2006-11-27 05:49:12
changed: 2009-11-28 21:58:54

note that both show the expiration in 2010.

if the registrant fails to renew the domain, the "auto-renew" policy
means that the domain is renewed automatically by the registry for
one year.  so now the registry "Expiration Date:" would show that
the domain is not expired, and indeed, the registrar has been billed
for the renewal.    if the registrant no longer wants to keep the domain,
then the registrar can have the domain name deleted and recover the
the money it was billed for automatically.

but if the registrant checks, the domain isn't reported as expired at
the registry (it will be shown to be expired at the registrar, however),
and the registrant could feel that they don't need to act since the
domain appears to have been renewed (and indeed, has).

note that this "auto-renew" we're discussing is between the registry
and all registrars.   this has nothing to do with the "auto-renewal"
agreements between a registrant and the registrar - which works by
having a credit card on file with the registrar and it is automatically
charged when the domain comes up for renewal.   the problem is that
there can be an issue with the credit card payment, such as an
expired card, or card over limit, or some other glitch.    if the
registrant just reads the top of the whois, they may think that the
domain renewal was paid for.

this is made worse by the fact that if the contact e-mail address is
within the domain, then when the domain expires, e-mail will no longer
work.   many individuals (and remarkably many companies) fail to keep
their e-mail address recorded at the registrar up to date when they
change ISPs, so the mails the registrar sends to let the registrant
know that the card authorization failed is never received, even when
this is not an e-mail address within the domain.

registrars are free to set individual policies at expiration, most
have a grace period after the domain expires which varies from 15 to
40 days before the domain is deleted, but at least one registrar has
no grace period and the domain is deleted immediately when it expires.
these grace periods are not in the registrar-registry agreements and
not affected by any policy within ICANN.

after a domain is deleted, there is a "Post Expiration" recovery
policy which is in the contract and mandated by ICANN.  but the
details of who the registrant has to proceed to effect the recovery
varies from registrar to registrar.

what i'm suggesting in the response above is that using the same term
expiration or expires for both the dates at the registry and the
registrar makes it difficult to ever hope to educate the average
individual domain holder.


>> Because many domains are handled by web-hosting/email-hosting registrars
>> and resellers, and these are often automated and competitively disparate
>> offerings, there is little uniformity on what happens and at what speed
>> changes are made to web sites and email routing when a domain expires.
>> This variation makes registrant education a difficult goal.
>>
>>     5. Whether to allow the transfer of a domain name during the RGP.
>>
>> Read as if ICANN policy should allow, from willing registrars or
>> resellers, transfer during the RGP, the answer is affirmative.  On the
>> other hand, to _require_ registrars and resellers is fraught with
>> difficulties.
>>
>> While it is slightly out of scope of the PEDNR WG, there is a related
>> issue of a registrant being able to transfer before the registration
>> expires, and in some cases this is precluded by registration agreements
>> that vary.   It would be good policy to require uniformity on this
>> aspect of oportunity to renew with a registrar or reseller of the
>> registrant's choice.


thanks for the encouragement and feedback,

-ron