Logo

Michelle DeSmyter's Personal Meeting Room - Shared screen with speaker view
Sue Schuler
27:41
Welcome to the meeting of the RA/RAA Amendment Discussion Group. Please announce your name before speaking for purposes of the transcript. Please mute your microphone when not speaking to help maintain sound quality. Thanks
Jeff Neuman
29:44
I agree.
Graeme Bunton
29:56
He says, having to drop off at 5...
Sue Schuler
31:39
: )
James Galvin (Afilias)
35:41
i very much like the one document approach.
James Galvin (Afilias)
35:57
it’s a reminder that we’re in this together and frankly we should be doing the same thing.
Maxim Alzoba
38:43
I do not think they agree to remove SLAs before the WHOIS sunset
Maxim Alzoba
41:26
if there are no words on when WHOIS goes down - there is no incentive for ICANN to do so
Maxim Alzoba
42:05
so without legal triggers - we might see WHOIS working in 10 years, also - all WHOIS RFCs should became obsolete :)
Graeme Bunton
42:18
Isn't there? I think it's in our contract that we need to run it until there is an obligation to run a replacement.
Maxim Alzoba
42:58
there are no words of when and how to kill the last one
Maxim Alzoba
43:02
the previous one
Jeff Neuman
43:24
And they would argue that unless and until there is some public facing tool, RDAP is NOT a replacement
Maxim Alzoba
44:13
so there should be a legal trigger in contracts
Maxim Alzoba
46:14
formally - those are interfaces to databases of Registries
Maxim Alzoba
46:22
and Registrars (sometimes)
Graeme Bunton
47:43
"Until ICANN requires a different protocol, Registrar will operate a WHOIS service available...."
Donna Austin, Neustar
48:06
Which what the RA also says Graeme
Donna Austin, Neustar
48:24
I thought the different protocol was RDAP
Graeme Bunton
48:41
Yep. I think we could technically turn it off today.
Maxim Alzoba
49:26
does “Until” bit say “and later there is no requirement of support of old protocols”
Maxim Alzoba
49:39
I am not sure
Graeme Bunton
51:59
I don't think we want to end up in court on this, so I'm not saying we should draw a hard line there. Nonetheless, I think it's pretty clear what our current requirements are re: still running whois.
Maxim Alzoba
52:17
there are words of “ ICANN reserves the right to specify alternative formats and protocols, and upon such specification, the Registry Operator will implement such alternative specification as soon as reasonably practicable.” … nothing prevents them from saying that those alternative protocols are WHOIS, and web-WHOIS
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
54:35
sorry I was late
Graeme Bunton
56:54
I like that a lot, Jim
Donna Austin, Neustar
57:22
This is language from the legal notice: RDAP enables access to current registration data and was created as an eventual replacement for the WHOIS protocol. It delivers registration data like WHOIS, but its implementation will change and standardize data access and query response formats. ICANN organization worked with a discussion group of gTLD registries and registrars to draft, seek, and take into account public comments prior to publication of this gTLD-RDAP Profile.
Maxim Alzoba
57:40
is in not true
Maxim Alzoba
58:10
they forgot about request to remove SLAs from RDAP paper
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
58:27
I’m not concurring with that characterization of what happened back then
Maxim Alzoba
59:27
we should say - it is not our fault that ICANN designed RDAP in the current form
Graeme Bunton
59:34
To be clear, I was saying we do not want that
Maxim Alzoba
01:04:01
nothing prevents ICANN to provide that kind of service
Owen Smigelski (Namecheap)
01:06:10
+1 Jim
Graeme Bunton
01:06:17
I like this Jim.
Owen Smigelski (Namecheap)
01:06:28
You and me both @Graeme!
Jody Kolker
01:06:53
+1 Jim.
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:07:11
you get both
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:07:21
both registry and registrar
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:08:05
nope
Jeff Neuman
01:08:48
right, so ICANN's lookup tool is not compliant
Maxim Alzoba
01:09:17
we need to make something saying that if bootstrap record from IANA is not available - then SLA should not be enforced until fixed
Graeme Bunton
01:09:56
I think we can try, and lets let ICANN do the convincing
Jeff Neuman
01:12:14
In case my point about the .org thing was confusing, I was saying their original position eg., just consenting to the purchase, was the right contractual thing to do
Jeff Neuman
01:12:21
But they got so much hell from the community
Jeff Neuman
01:12:33
That is what we will have to deal with as well
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:13:15
that’s a good point Rick
Graeme Bunton
01:22:21
Rob hasn't posted his bit yet.
Brian King (MarkMonitor)
01:23:19
I need to drop. Thanks all for good productive conversation today.
Donna Austin, Neustar
01:24:56
automagically ... good word
Donna Austin, Neustar
01:27:47
If it is the case that the Temp Spec has become policy, then doesn't that mean that the IRT will be picking up this as part of the implementation.
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:28:08
understood re: development time… no argument there
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:28:21
will need to account for that, most certainly
Jeff Neuman
01:29:41
I don't know the answer to that.
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:30:03
@Jody: client or server?
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:30:22
I think you meant server?
Sam Demetriou
01:31:06
If an item was in the Temp Spec and became a policy recommendation in the EPDP (and was subsequently approved), It would go to the IRT for implementation. If there was something in the Temp Spec that DIDN’T become a policy recommendation in the EPDP, it just…goes away
Jeff Neuman
01:31:51
But is there anything in the policy that would allow us to draft contract language that would say that Registries that have Searchability in Exhibit A does not apply (And this is Exhibit A in the RA)
Sam Demetriou
01:32:30
I would say ICANN can’t enforce it
Sam Demetriou
01:32:52
So for them to try to slip it in here feels a bit dicey
bbacon
01:33:24
Agree- It’s not agreed to move along into other policies
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:34:38
right jeff, +1 to your last point!
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:34:43
RDAP is not WHOIS!
Sam Demetriou
01:34:46
The way I see it is, the search ability requirement goes away when the requirements to offer the WHOIS protocol goes away
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:34:47
that’s the point.
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:34:55
+1 Sam
Graeme Bunton
01:35:41
I need to drop. Good luck and thanks all!
Jeff Neuman
01:36:01
@RIck - agreed!
bbacon
01:36:04
+2 sam the assumption that search ability transfers is not appropriate
Jeff Neuman
01:36:13
that was my point from last week
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:37:19
lol
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:37:25
ROFL
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:37:28
I feel the love
Maxim Alzoba
01:37:37
bye all
Jeff Neuman
01:37:45
We can set up a new clean Google Doc
Jeff Neuman
01:37:47
:)
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:37:50
count me in
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:37:57
and yes Jeff, a fresh google doc
James Galvin (Afilias)
01:38:11
perhaps sue or zoe could set one up for us?
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:38:19
should be enough time
Sue Schuler
01:38:37
should I extend next week's meeting to 90 minutes?
Sue Schuler
01:38:47
ok
Jeff Neuman
01:38:59
I can set up a Google Doc.....no problem
Rick Wilhelm (Verisign)
01:40:07
no worries