Public Comment is a vital part of our multistakeholder model. It provides a mechanism for stakeholders to have their opinions and recommendations formally and publicly documented. It is an opportunity for the ICANN community to effect change and improve policies and operations.
هذا المحتوى متوفر فقط باللغة (أو اللغات)
Submissions for this Proceeding
Initial Report on the Transfer Policy Review - Phase 1(a)
View this Proceeding
My Submissions
Search Public Comment Submissions For This Proceeding
To search for keywords within Public Comment submissions documents or pages, type in the keyword and press Enter after each selection.
Submission Summary:
Please extend the public commentary period to mid-September 2022.
Submission Summary:
ICANN org would like to thank the Transfer PDP team for its thoughtful and dedicated work in producing this report. ICANN org hopes that its review of the initial report and input provided in this form will support the Transfer PDP Working Group as it discusses community input, and establishes its final recommendations for a successful and efficient Consensus Policy implementation.
Submission Summary:
The Internet Commerce Association expresses its gratitude to the Transfer Policy Working Group for its diligent, thoughtful, and timely Interim Report. The Transfer Policy obviously presents complex issues which are challenging to navigate, and on the whole we support the Proposals made in the Interim Report. Nevertheless, we do have some significant concerns regarding particular Proposals within the Interim Report which we ask the Working Gro...
Submission Summary:
At the end of June 2022, ICANN published the ICANN Initial Report on the Transfer Policy Review - Phase 1(a), seeking input from the community.
We welcome the work of ICANN on releasing the document in line with Workstream 2 Recommendations on ICANN Transparency. The policy governs the procedure and requirements for Registrants to transfer their domain names from one Registrar to another, also referred to as an inter-Registrar tran...
Submission Summary:
The ICANN Business Constituency (BC) supports all recommendations except Rec 3, and we have provided explanation for other recommendations that we have supported.
Submission Summary:
I think that the change to the losing party FOA process is dangerous for owners of intellectual property including individuals, SMBs and multi-billion dollar businesses as well as institutions and non-profit organizations. I am requesting more time for the public to comment and discuss the proposed changes.
Submission Summary:
The most valuable assets many companies own are their domain names. This is true with everyone from small end users, large corporate end users, investors, organizations, non-profits, etc.
Some of the proposed changes seem like a terrible idea when it comes to domain security. All it would do is lead to a more rampant problem with domain theft than already exists.
It would be giving an extra bag of tools to those with the most ...
Submission Summary:
The RySG welcomes the opportunity to provide feedback on the Initial Report on the Transfer Policy Review - Phase 1(a) and provides comments and alternative language for recommendation 8, 13 and 18.
Submission Summary:
We believe that:
- transfers should be simple (for the RNH) to perform.
- restrictions on when a domain can be transferred should be minimal.
- a transfer should not require sharing of private personal data.
We believe this can be achieved in balance with ensuring that the updated transfer policy does not make it easier to steal domain names. We thank this PDP WG for their efforts towards meeting these goals....
Submission Summary:
SSAC2022-06: SSAC Input to the GNSO Transfer Policy Review PDP WG on DNSSEC
Submitted in lieu of completing the form.
Submission Summary:
I support the change from highly restrictive 60-day locks to 30-day locks instead. Added other suggestions on security and preventing unscrupulous registrars from exploiting RNHs. Thank you.
Submission Summary:
Under Section 22, A Registrar imposed transfer away fee should be banned where their intent is arguably to deter Registrants from freely porting to a different Registrar.
Submission Summary:
Thank you for your work modernizing domain transfers.
I'm concerned about the decision to remove the losing registrar's Form of Authorization (FOA). With the FOA, a domain owner could be made aware of a fraudulent transfer and have time to contact the registrar to stop it. Under the proposed system, the domain registrant likely won't learn of a transfer until after the transfer is complete.
While this will make transfers easier and...