From: Larry Bloch 
Sent: Wednesday, 29 January 2003 5:21 PM
To: Jo Lim
Subject: Transfers policy comments - due by 31/1/03

Jo,

Reading the current submissions makes it quite clear to me that there is some consensus 
on the problems with the current policy. My view is broadly in agreement with the bulk 
of comments made, i.e.:

1. Mid term transfer should not penalise the registrant. I think Enetica's suggestion 
is sensible and requires minimal process or technological change:
--
"Our preference is to simply increase the window where a transfer  can be done without 
loss of registration time from the current 90  days to 18 months. This would allow 
registrants the freedom to choose a new registrar anytime after the first 6 months, and 
would  be much closer to gTLD procedures. It also prevents the licence from ever being 
valid for more than 3 &1/2 years, i.e. repeated transfers won't result in a licence 
valid for 10 years."

2. Requiring an email confirmation from the registrant is simply senseless bureaucracy. 
Graham Maltby says it most succinctly:
--
"As I see it, there is very little safeguard given by requiring a confirmation of the 
transfer by email, that is not already provided by the domain password.

If an unauthorized party had access to the domain password, it would be a simple matter 
to change the email addresses listed, prior to asking for the transfer.  This effectively 
bypasses any value the process provides."

Regards

Larry Bloch
Chief Executive Officer
NetRegistry Pty Ltd