I think there are two parts to your question. First, the Registry Stakeholder Group (RySG) request for reconsideration that triggered this proposal; perhaps someone else in this list (from the RySG) can speak to that.
The second part would be ICANN organization’s proposal to address the RySG request. ICANN is putting for the community’s consideration to do as requested by the RySG and remove the requirement to implement RDAP. We are looking to learn what other members from the community have to say. Regards, -- Francisco On 9/21/16, 2:12 PM, "Andrew Newton" <[email protected]> wrote: Is there a reason being given? -andy On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Francisco Arias <[email protected]> wrote: > The proposal is that neither registrars nor registries in the gTLD space would have to do RDAP (at least not for now). In other words, the proposal is to reverse the requirement that went out on 26 July to gTLD registries and registrars. There is no timeline on when the request could be reissued. > > Per the email below, should you have comments or concerns, please feel free to submit them to the list [email protected] before 4-Oct. > > Regards, > > -- > Francisco > > On 9/21/16, 11:39 AM, "Andrew Newton" <[email protected]> wrote: > > For those of us who don't speak ICANNanian, does this mean domain > registrars do not have to implement RDAP and that domain registries > have until March 4, 2017 to implement it? > > -andy > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Francisco Arias > <[email protected]> wrote: > > FYI, > > > > > > > > On 9/21/16, 10:41 AM, "[email protected] on behalf > > of Dennis Chang" <[email protected] on behalf of > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear IRT members, > > > > > > > > As you know, on 7 February 2014, the ICANN Board adopted GNSO consensus > > policy recommendations regarding the provision of “Thick” Whois by all gTLD > > registries. > > > > > > > > In consultation with the consensus policy Implementation Review Team (IRT), > > the implementation team identified two expected outcomes in the policy > > development process (PDP) recommendations: > > > > The consistent labeling and display of WHOIS output for all gTLDs > > The transition from Thin to Thick WHOIS for .COM, .NET and .JOBS > > > > > > > > The first outcome was published as a consensus policy, the Registry > > Registration Data Directory Services Consistent Labeling and Display Policy > > (CL&D Policy), on 26 July 2016. > > > > > > > > In August 2016, the Registry Stakeholder Group (RySG) submitted a Request > > for Reconsideration (RfR) regarding the CL&D Policy. The RfR objects to the > > inclusion of RDAP as part of the Consensus Policy as RDAP was not > > contemplated or referenced in the policy recommendations. > > > > > > > > To resolve this matter, ICANN proposes the following path forward for the > > IRT: > > > > > > > > 1. ICANN to issue a revised CL&D Policy to all registry operators, removing > > provision 12. For your reference, provision 12 states: “The implementation > > of an RDAP service in accordance with the "RDAP Operational Profile for gTLD > > Registries and Registrars" is required for all gTLD registries in order to > > achieve consistent labeling and display.” Additionally, I have attached the > > proposed revised CL&D Policy. > > > > > > > > 2. Issue a revised notification to registry operators regarding > > implementation of the CL&D Policy, clearly indicating what has changed in > > the revised CL&D Policy. > > > > > > > > 3. Set the revised CL&D Policy effective date to allow for full 6-month > > implementation from the date of the revised notice. > > > > > > > > 4. Update the published CL&D Policy on the ICANN website, noting a change > > has been made. Note: The revised CL&D Policy would not be subject to another > > Public Comment process. > > > > > > > > 5. Rescind the notification sent to registrars to implement RDAP. > > > > > > > > ICANN intends to issue notices for registries and registrars to implement > > RDAP after further dialogue with the community. > > > > > > > > Please let us know if you have comments or concerns by responding to this > > list ([email protected]). Unless we hear otherwise, we > > intend to move forward with the plan outlined above on 4 October 2016. > > > > > > > > — > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > Dennis S. Chang > > > > GDD Services & Engagement Program Director > > > > +1 213 293 7889 > > > > Skype: dennisSchang > > > > www.icann.org "One World, One Internet" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > regext mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext > > > > _______________________________________________ regext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
