nanog mailing list archives
Re: New ICANN registrant change process
From: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 15:43:35 -0300
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <jra () baylink com> wrote:
I'll go ahead and assume I wasn't the last person to get this memo (courtesy Lauren Weinstein's PRIVACY Digest): https://opensrs.com/blog/2016/06/icanns-new-transfer-policy-will-impact-business-customers/ It does seem that this is going to make life difficult for a bunch of pretty normal business processes. If you didn't know about it either... ask yourself why not.
Although I'm not a member of the WG that defined such policy, having seen the many occasions where domain hijacks occurred, I'm totally fine with the outcome. I only see real impact for "wholesale" registrars, like OpenSRS, eNom and Endurance, since they have to figure out a way to be compliant with policy without actually having contact with the registrants, and this kind of problem will continue to haunt them as they just operate a way for companies to operate in the gTLD market outside of its framework. Rubens
Current thread:
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process, (continued)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Christopher Morrow (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process David Conrad (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Christopher Morrow (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process David Conrad (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Christopher Morrow (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Rubens Kuhl (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process David Conrad (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Jaap Akkerhuis (Jul 06)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Rubens Kuhl (Jul 07)
- Re: New ICANN registrant change process Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 06)