• Home
• Domains
• Registrars
• auDA Policy
• auDA Foundation
• About auDA
• auDA News
• ANZIAs
• auDA Blog
• Twitter
• YouTube Channel
• Help

• Contact Us|
• Glossary|
• Privacy Policy|
• Sitemap|
• WHOIS

auDA Policy

• Panels and Committees
  • DNSSEC Working Group
  • 2012 Industry Advisory Panel
  • Secondary Market Working Group
  • 2010 Names Policy Panel
  • New 2LDs Advisory Panel
  • Industry Competition Advisory Panel
  • 2007 Names Policy Panel
  • Name Policy Review Panel
  • Registry Competition Review Panel
  • National Reference Group
  • Code of Practice Committee
  • New Names Advisory Panel
  • Name Policy Advisory Panel
  • Competition Model Advisory Panel
  • Dispute Resolution Working Group
• Policy Reviews
• auDRP

SMWG Teleconference - 14 July 2011

Present: Brett Fenton, Rod Keys, Jo Lim, George Pongas, Ned O’Meara, Chris Wright

Apologies: Michael Sojevic, Peter Stevenson

Actions

• JL to draft minutes and final report

Discussion

The Working Group’s Issues Paper was released for public comment on 19 May 2011 with a closing date of 1 July 2011. Nine submissions were received.

The Working Group discussed its recommendations in light of public comments.

Consumer issues

1. Registrant transfer process and fees

Public comments supported the suggestion that there should be minimum mandated standards for the registrant transfer process, in particular that there should be a requirement for a confirmation email to be sent to the registrant contact (as is the case with registrar transfers).

Submissions also agreed that auDA should advise people that they can transfer to another registrar prior to processing a change of registrant. Working Group members noted comments that transferring to another registrar is not necessarily straightforward and can sometimes complicate the process. It was agreed that auDA should make it clear that the registrar transfer and registrant transfer processes are separate and will not happen simultaneously.

Working Group members agreed to recommend that:

• auDA should mandate a registrant transfer process, along the lines of the registrar transfer process
• auDA should publish information for registrants about the registrant transfer process, including the fact that they can choose to transfer their domain name to another registrar prior to processing a change of registrant.

2. Six month prohibition on transfers

There was no public support for the retention of the six month prohibition on registrant transfers. Most submissions argued that the block has not had the intended effect, and has simply created an administrative burden for all concerned.

The Working Group noted that the six month block is merely a mechanism for enforcing the policy rule that prohibits the registration of domain names for the sole purpose of resale. Removing the block would be an administrative change only, and would not change the underlying policy rule.

Working Group members agreed to recommend that the six month prohibition on registrant transfers should be removed.

3. Drop catching services

Public comments indicated general support for the suggestion that auDA should provide more information about drop catching services, including clearly identifying the registrars that provide these services.

There was very little support for the proposal that there should be a formal accreditation process for registrars that want to provide drop catching services. Accordingly, it was agreed not to pursue this proposal any further at this time.

Working Group members agreed to recommend that auDA should provide more information to the public about drop catching services, including clearly identifying the registrars that provide these services.

4. Auction listings

Public comments endorsed the proposal that providers should bear responsibility for ensuring that domain name auction and sale listings are accurate.

Working Group members agreed that as there is no requirement for any action to be taken, there is no need to put forward a recommendation on this issue.

Industry issues

1. Registry operations

AusRegistry’s submission confirmed its earlier advice to the Working Group, which is that there is no current problem with registry performance. In the event that a problem arises, AusRegistry has a mandate to change the Registry Usage Policy to address the problem (eg. rate limits).

GP and CW noted NetFleet’s comments in relation to the time period for blocking EPP create commands before and after the purge cycle.

Working Group members noted that if AusRegistry decided to introduce rate limiting (in order that the registry can meet its SLA obligations), it would apply to all registrars at all times (ie. not just to registrars participating in the drop, during the purge cycle). Whilst the effect would be negligible on normal transactions, all registrars would need to be informed about the changes in advance.

Working Group members agreed to recommend that AusRegistry should clarify its process for changing the Registry Usage Policy, including timing of changes and communications with registrars.  

2. Registrar connection sharing

Submissions did not demonstrate much public concern or interest in this issue.

Although there is no evidence of “shell” registrars in .au, the Working Group noted that it has been a problem in the gTLDs and therefore we should try to avoid it becoming a problem in .au in future.

Working Group members agreed to recommend that auDA should publish a policy which:

• clarifies that connection sharing between related registrars requires auDA’s prior written consent
• specifically prohibits connection sharing between unrelated registrars.

3. Registrar competition

Again, this issue did not attract much public comment.

The Working Group discussed AusRegistry’s role vis-a-vis registrars who want to develop their own drop catching services. It was agreed that AusRegistry cannot provide direct advice and assistance to individual registrars. However, in the interests of transparency, it was felt that AusRegistry should publish some general information about drop catching, which would be available to all registrars. For example, AusRegistry could highlight the sections of the Registry Usage Policy that are particularly relevant to drop catching, and the penalties for breach.

Working Group members agreed to recommend that AusRegistry should publish a document that provides general information about drop catching to all registrars.

Summary of Working Group Recommendations:

• auDA should mandate a registrant transfer process, along the lines of the registrar transfer process.
• auDA should publish information for registrants about the registrant transfer process, including the fact that they can choose to transfer their domain name to another registrar prior to processing a change of registrant.
• The six month prohibition on registrant transfers should be removed.
• auDA should provide more information to the public about drop catching services, including clearly identifying the registrars that provide these services.
• AusRegistry should clarify its process for changing the Registry Usage Policy, including timing of changes and communications with registrars.  
• auDA should publish a policy which:

1. clarifies that connection sharing between related registrars requires auDA’s prior written consent
2. specifically prohibits connection sharing between unrelated registrars.

• AusRegistry should publish a document that provides general information about drop catching to all registrars.

Last Updated: 05/09/2011 12:24