Versions Compared

Old Version 5

changes.mady.by.user Charla K. Shambley

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Charla K. Shambley

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

SAC047 was published on 15 April 2011. All SSAC publications can be found at https://www.icann.org/groups/ssac/documents.


View file
namesac-047-en.pdf
height400


Recommendation DescriptionCurrent Phase

Recommendation 1

The SSAC recommends that ICANN define a testing process that emulates a full failover scenario and that successor and emergency registry operators demonstrate their ability to satisfy the testing criteria.

Status
colourGreen
titleClosed

Recommendation 2

The SSAC recommends that ICANN preserve operational data about ex-registries. ICANN should define a framework to share such data with the community. Availability of such data will ensure that the registration transition process can be studied and if needed, improved.

Status
colourGreen
titleCLOSED
Phase 5 | Close

Recommendation 3The SSAC emphasizes that in many if not most circumstances, restoring domain name system (DNS) resolution services will be the number one priority for registrants and gTLD users. This requires DNS zone files for gTLDs to be escrowed separately.

Status
colourGreen
titleClosed

Recommendation 4The SSAC notes that the Explanatory Memorandum makes no provision to ensure that a registrant retains the registration of a domain name during transition. The process must have a provision to lock domain ownership during a transition.

Status
colourGreen
titleClosed

Recommendation 5The SSAC notes that in certain operating circumstances, registry functions, especially critical services such as DNS resolution and DNS security (DNSSEC), may be separable from other functions (registry database maintenance). The SSAC asks whether in such circumstances critical functions can be transitioned separately.

Status
colourGreen
titleClosed

Recommendation 6

With respect to registration fees, the SSAC also notes that certain registrant information is not associated with or collected for the purpose of the public directory service, but is instead part of the administrative data that might be split between the registry and the registrar. If the registry is replaced, one of two conditions might exist:

  1. The current registry operator has information on the payment cycle. In this case, the current registry operator must provide the billing and payment cycle to the successor registry along with each registrant registration information.
  2. The registrar has payment information. In this case, the current registry operator must provide the sponsoring registrar information for each domain that is registered to the successor registry.

Status
colourGreen
titleClosed

Recommendation 7

Lastly, the SSAC makes the following recommendations regarding the construction of the Explanatory Memorandum:

  1. It should be footnoted with references to the AG.
  2. It should reference and use defined terms from the Applicant Guidebook rather than crafting its own definitions.
  3. It imposes requirements on various parties, but it is unclear if these have the stature of requirements stated in the Applicant Guidebook. Since its function is to be explanatory, the text should truly be explanatory as opposed to normative.

Status
colourGreen
titleClosed