<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Agreed, Ken, and thank you for all of your work on this issue! <br>
</p>
<p>Sorry if I missed something, but have all timeframes been removed
(from 60 to 0)? I understand it has been a 60 day lock, and
you/NCSG wanted a 30 day lock (which made sense to me). What is
the minimum time now? <br>
</p>
<p>Best, Kathy<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/27/2024 11:39 AM, Ken Herman
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:082801da98b9$2a5c3a70$7f14af50$@kherman.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator"
content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style>@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#467886;
text-decoration:underline;}p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
mso-add-space:auto;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}p.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
mso-add-space:auto;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}p.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
mso-add-space:auto;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}p.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
mso-add-space:auto;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}</style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">Hello Fellow NCSG
Members:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I would like to thank members for
responding to my request for input last week regarding the
elimination of a transfer restriction. I shared the ideas
presented in that message with the Working Group.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u>Current status</u>:<o:p></o:p></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst"
style="margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo4">The
discussion regarding a transfer restriction (a preferred
term rather than a transfer “Lock”) after an inter-registrar
transfer evolved to a position whereby a transfer
restriction could be lifted only under some very specific
circumstances and with specific conditions. <o:p></o:p></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast"
style="margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo4">The
the circumstances can vary, and enumerating them would serve
no useful purpose, the proposed conditions were very
specific, and included ensuring that there was a specific
request from the RNH and that request, along with its
rationale and the actions taken by the Registrar, are to be
documented as a matter of policy; i.e. those conditions
could be audited for compliance. <o:p></o:p></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Bottom line: I believe the WG has moved
adequately towards a resolution regarding the lifting of the
transfer restriction in a way that addresses the concerns I
expressed previously. </b>It retains a requirement for the
restriction, which is something that did not exist in the
original policy (it was optional for the Registrar) while
allowing Registered Name Holders and Registrars to work
together on situations that may facilitate lifting the
restriction, while requiring registrars to fully document the
process with requirements for record retention.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><o:p> </o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>I think we can accept this approach, </b>but
of course I welcome any additional thoughts<b>.<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><o:p> </o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif">Ken<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div
style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">
NCSG-Discuss <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU"><NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU></a> <b>On
Behalf Of </b>Ken Herman<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, April 21, 2024 2:28 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Request for Input on Transfer Policy -
To retain or eliminate a transfer lock<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">Hello Fellow NCSG
Members:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">I request your input
regarding an issue under discussed by the Transfer Policy
Review Working Group (TPRWG).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-GB">The issue concerns
whether to allow for the transfer of a domain to a
different registrar in fewer than 30 days after an initial
transfer. <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-GB">My recommended NCSG
position: Under no circumstances should a registrar allow
for a transfer in fewer than 30 days.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-GB">Please review the
points below and let me know if you agree with my position
or prefer for me to present some other position. <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">Certainly, let me know
if you have any questions.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:6.0pt"><span
lang="EN-GB">I look forward to hearing from you.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:6.0pt"><span
lang="EN-GB">Ken<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">Major points regarding
the issue include:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<ol style="margin-top:0in" type="1" start="1">
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst"
style="margin-bottom:6.0pt;margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><span
lang="EN-GB">Current policy imposes a 60-day restriction
on any inter-registrar transfers after a transfer. In
other words, if I move my registered domain name to a new
registrar, I could not move my domain name again for 60
days. No exceptions (at least that I am aware of). My
understanding is that this is a measure to protect against
domain name theft.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="margin-bottom:6.0pt;margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><span
lang="EN-GB">In previous discussions, the working group
recommended changing the lock to 30 days and would require
all registries to adhere to this timeframe. The proposed
preliminary recommendation reads as follows:<br>
<br>
<b>GROUP 1(a) Rec 17(a): The Registrar MUST restrict the
Registered Name Holder (RNH) from transferring a domain
name to a new Registrar within 30 days / 720 hours of
the completion of an inter-Registrar transfer. To the
extent that a Registry and/or Registrar has an existing
policy and/or practice of restricting the RNH from
transferring a domain name to a new Registrar for a
different period of time following an inter-Registrar
transfer, all policies and practices MUST be updated to
be consistent with this new requirement.</b><o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="margin-bottom:6.0pt;margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><span
lang="EN-GB">This preliminary recommendation has been
reopened in light of current discussions around the Change
of Registrant Data policies.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="margin-bottom:6.0pt;margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><span
lang="EN-GB">The proposed revision would allow a registrar
to initiate a transfer in fewer than 30 days under certain
circumstances. The circumstances proposed include cases
where the registrant has an established relationship with
the registrar. <o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="margin-bottom:6.0pt;margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><span
lang="EN-GB">Some registrants have a problem with the
lock, as indicated in the Charter for the WG, which notes
in paragraph d4 that “Survey responses and data provided
by ICANN’s Global Support Center indicate that registrants
do not understand the 60-day lock and express frustration
when it prevents them from completing an inter-registrar
transfer.”<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="margin-bottom:6.0pt;margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><span
lang="EN-GB">Some registrars have explained that in a
small number of cases the 30-day lock imposes a business
hardship, and this is mentioned in the charter in
paragraph d7, “In its survey response, the Registrar
Stakeholder Group indicated that the 60-day lock hinders
corporate acquisitions, consolidations, and divestitures
of large lists of domains to new legal entities”.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="margin-bottom:6.0pt;margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><span
lang="EN-GB">Some registrars even suggest that having any
lock after a transfer only offers limited protection from
domain theft (which is the main reason for imposing a lock
in the first place). Some registrars report many
complaints about having a lock.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="margin-bottom:6.0pt;margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><span
lang="EN-GB">Some stakeholder groups express in the WG
meetings discomfort with any reason to remove the lock,
and feel the lock remains an important security control..
<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="margin-bottom:6.0pt;margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><span
lang="EN-GB">In my opinion, evidence of the impact of a
lock for reducing domain theft is slim. As noted, my
understanding is that the lock was initially included in
the policy since moving domains quickly across many
registrars was an indication of potential domain theft and
locking the domain for a period of time allowed for
registrants to recover these domains.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><b><span
lang="EN-GB">Given that:</span></b><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></li>
<ol style="margin-top:0in" type="a" start="1">
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3"><b><span
lang="EN-GB">Evidence of the impact of the lock is
inconclusive, and</span></b><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3"><b><span
lang="EN-GB">Professional domain managers have for
many years coped with having the lock, and</span></b><span
lang="EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3"><b><span
lang="EN-GB">Providing the ability of registrars to
undo a lock enables a registrar to manipulate, and
potentially undermine, the trust of registrants, and<o:p></o:p></span></b></li>
<li class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast"
style="margin-left:0in;mso-add-space:auto;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3"><b><span
lang="EN-GB">Reducing the lock to 30 days provides a
reasonable compromise.</span></b><span lang="EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></li>
</ol>
</ol>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.75in"><b><span
lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:6.0pt;margin-left:.75in"><b><span
lang="EN-GB">My suggestion is for NCSG to take the
position to retain the current language of recommendation
17(a); i.e. to maintain the 30-day lock. I further suggest
that the working group call on ICANN to more intensively
study the impact of having a transfer lock, both of the <o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:6.0pt;margin-left:.75in"><b><span
lang="EN-GB">While I would need to confirm, I believe ALAC
and the Business Constituency have a similar position.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:6.0pt"><b><span
lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:6.0pt"><b><span
lang="EN-GB">References: all documents (Charter,
preliminary reports, etc) can be found here: <a
href="https://community.icann.org/display/TPRPDP"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://community.icann.org/display/TPRPDP</a><o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:6.0pt"><b><span
lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif"
lang="EN-GB"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Kathy Kleiman
Past President, Domain Name Rights Coalition</pre>
</body>
</html>