The next meeting of the Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) Part C PDP Working Group is scheduled for Tuesday 31 July at 14.00 UTC for 60 minutes.
007:00 PST, 10:00 EST, 11:00 Buenos Aires/Rio de Janeiro, 15:00 London, 16:00 CET, 17:00 Khartoum (EAT), 19:00 Karachi (PKT)
Adobe Connect: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/irtppartc/
For those of you using Adobe Connect for the first time, please find a short introduction video here: https://admin.adobe.acrobat.com/_a227210/participatemeeting/
Proposed Agenda
- Agenda Review
- Roll Call / SOI
- Continue review of public comments received to date (see attached the latest version of the review tool, now incl. ALAC)
- Next steps / Confirm Next Meeting
For review
Adobe Connect Chat Transcript
Berry Cobb: Welecome to the 31 July 2012 IRTP-C Conference Call.
Mikey O'Connor: hi gang...
Glen de Saint Gery: Hi Mikey and Berry, I will be on the call today!
Berry Cobb: For those that care....IRTP is documented in its entireity. I'm takin back by how long IRTP Policy work has been going on. http://gnso.icann.org/en/ongoing-work/irtp-policy.htm
Michele Neylon: new Sky Fall trailer distracted me :)
Michele Neylon: sorry http://comingsoon.ie/skyfall-new-trailer-released/
Bladel: Thanks, Berry. Wow.
Berry Cobb: Marika already is sending emails! #fail
Mikey O'Connor: what's your Paypal ID Berry, James needs to collect his $50
Michele Neylon: Berry - I thought she was in Australia?
Chris Chaplow: Hi Berry and glen
Berry Cobb: She is.
Chris Chaplow: sorry -- Glen
Berry Cobb: So is the goal to attempt to create a high level process, similar to Rob Hall's domain lifecycle overview?
Chris Chaplow: Thanks
Simonetta Batteiger: you're trying to give me more work? ;-)
Bladel: Nope! Referencing work that you & Bob have already done earlier in teh working group. :)
Simonetta Batteiger: infographic time/
Simonetta Batteiger: ?
avri: sounds like this is chairs/support action item that needs to be dealt - how do we get this overview written.
Michele Neylon: I pinged Squishy's dad
Michele Neylon: let's see what he says :)
Mikey O'Connor: Squishy's Dad rules on infographics
Michele Neylon: He hasn't done that many tbh
Simonetta Batteiger: that makes little sense, or does it?
Simonetta Batteiger: the only thing that may make sense is to offer the new registrant the option to opt out for their future transfer on
Simonetta Batteiger: such that this opt out is not "transferring to a new registrant"
Simonetta Batteiger: goes to show that most people (including the Registry Stakeholder Group) think of it as a combined process
Roy Dykes -- RySG: No issue, James. I'll research as best I can.
Berry Cobb: http://forum.icann.org/lists/irtp-c-initial-report/msg00001.html
Michele Neylon: they'd have a list of who voted
Berry Cobb: Chuck submitted.
Michele Neylon: in suppor of the comments
Michele Neylon: ie. it should be pretty clear
Michele Neylon: since they force a vote on each submission
Michele Neylon: unlike us
Michele Neylon: *sigh*
Michele Neylon: I wish we did
Bladel: If we did, we would never comment.
Simonetta Batteiger: The issue may be that there is no clear definition which fields in the WhoIs constitute the "registrant"
Simonetta Batteiger: or does that definition exist?
Bladel: @Simonetta: Correct.
Simonetta Batteiger: so different organizations seem to have different philosophies on how to interprete who the registrant is
Simonetta Batteiger: some may not think of an organization as the registrant and only allow a person as a registrant
Mikey O'Connor: this is also conflating change of Registrar with change of Registrant. in this case, again, the Registrant is just the Registrant, not "prior" and "new"
Berry Cobb: Is the only real authority on this on to whom the Credit Card belongs to?
Bladel: @Berry, no that could be a 3rd entity altogether! :)
Mikey O'Connor: if we're putting the two processes back together, we might as well declare "no consensus" right now
Simonetta Batteiger: Mikey, I'm not saying we need to, but it shows that we need to be very clear about what we're doing
Simonetta Batteiger: or we're confusing people
Simonetta Batteiger: and we may not reach our goal to keep things simple
Mikey O'Connor: agree -- see ALAC comment
Simonetta Batteiger: currently we are confusing people... which shows in the comments we received
Simonetta Batteiger: I'm not sure it's the terms new and prior, but I think it's the concept to have this be a two step separate process...
Simonetta Batteiger: => would be nice to get confirmation
Simonetta Batteiger: from the RySG
avri: I don't see the interpretation of the comment that says we should not separate the processes.
Simonetta Batteiger: agree with Avri
Simonetta Batteiger: but it shows the part that will require some kind of an FAQ on the new policy document
Berry Cobb: It goes back to having to document current state process, that is perhaps role based, and ID all the use cases.
Matt Serlin: apologies but i need to drop off to prep for a call at the top of the hour
Bladel: Acknowledged. Thanks Matt.
Simonetta Batteiger: I really like that idea!
Simonetta Batteiger: agree with James's idea on the list of use / list of expiration events
Simonetta Batteiger: I don't think there is a definition of the auth info code use in policy, or is there? I think that's why people use it differently
Simonetta Batteiger: some treat it as a short term token
Simonetta Batteiger: some treat it as a PW like thing
Simonetta Batteiger: need to drop off... thank you James!
