RE: domreg BOF Meeting Minutes

["Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>]

Bill,

That's a policy decision.  The requirement is intended to define the units
of measurement, and registry policy should determine the actual minimum
value.  That specific text can certainly be changed to make it more clear
that the intention is to define units and not policy.

Scott Hollenbeck
VeriSign Global Registry Services

-----Original Message-----
From: J. William Semich [mailto:bsemich@worldnames.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 10:07 AM
To: Geva Patz; 'provreg List'
Subject: Re: domreg BOF Meeting Minutes


Many (the majority?) of the ccTLDs require a minimum two-year initial
registration period.

Bill Semich
.NU Domain

At 09:50 AM 12/20/00 -0500, Geva Patz wrote:

<snip>

>Finally, we should probably go through the draft to make
>sure that there aren't any small details in it that aren't
>requirements per se. An example is this sort of thing:
>
>>  The registration period for domain names MUST be measured in
>>  years, with a minimum period of one year and a maximum period
>>  defined by registry policy.
>
>Although this captures the current situation in most gTLDs (and
>many ccTLDs) accurately, there's absolutely no reason to make
>the minimum period of a year a high-level requirement. In fact,
>there's a good reason not to: a protocol designed literally
>to this requirement might include a validity counter with a
>resolution in years, making it impossible for registries to
>implement a policy with finer resolution.
>
>This is the only example that leapt out at me on my first few
>passes, but a closer reading may yield other, similar situations
>where current practice should not be reflected as a requirement.
>
>Geva Patz
>geva@bbn.com
>
>
Bill Semich
President and Founder
WorldNames, Inc.
http://www.worldnames.net
bsemich@worldnames.net