Subscribe to RSS Feed

07|07|2010 09:42 am EDT

Have Your Say on Domain Transfers and Domain Hijacking

by Michele Neylon in Categories: ICANN / Policy

The following is a guest post by Michele Neylon, founder of the web hosting company Blacknight and chairman of the working group asking for feedback in this article. Since ICANN policy affects us all, we encourage our readers to provide their feedback on the issues identified by the working group.

ICANN’s Generic Names Supporting Organisation (GNSO) has formed a working group to consider changes to the domain transfer process to enhance security and reduce hijacking. ┬áThe working group consists of registrars, aftermarket players, domainers and other members of the ICANN Community. ┬áThe group published its preliminary recommendations at the ICANN meeting in Brussels two weeks ago and the 20-day comment period has just begun.

The key areas of focus for the working group are as follows:

  1. Whether a process for urgent return/resolution of a domain name should be developed, as discussed within the SSAC hijacking report (http://www.icann.org/announcements/hijacking-report-12jul05.pdf; see alsohttp://www.icann.org/correspondence/cole-to-tonkin-14mar05.htm);
  2. Whether additional provisions on undoing inappropriate transfers are needed, especially with regard to disputes between a Registrant and Admin Contact. The policy is clear that the Registrant can overrule the AC, but how this is implemented is currently at the discretion of the registrar;
  3. Whether special provisions are needed for a change of registrant near a change of registrar. The policy does not currently deal with change of registrant, which often figures in hijacking cases;
  4. Whether standards or best practices should be implemented regarding use of Registrar Lock status (e.g., when it may/may not, should/should not be applied);
  5. Whether, and if so, how best to clarify denial reason #7: A domain name was already in “lock status” provided that the Registrar provides a readily accessible and reasonable means for the Registered Name Holder to remove the lock status.

Comments by registrants, registrars and other interested parties are strongly encouraged and can be viewed at:

http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#irtp-b-initial-report

The deadline for submitting comments is 25 July, 2010.

Tags: , , , , ,

1 Comment

solitaire

July 7, 2010 @ 2:27 pm EDT

Very nice post… I’m interesting to learn what registrants will say about this matter

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply