Logo
ICANN
ICANN

Public Comment

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.

Ce contenu est uniquement disponible en

  • English

Name: Eric Rokobauer
Date: 28 Nov 2022
Affiliation: Newfold Digital, Inc.
Email: eric.rokobauer@endurance.com
Original Public Comment: Registration Data Consensus Policy for gTLDs
Please provide your feedback:
Section 1 accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Section 2 accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Section 3 accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Section 4 accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Section 5 accurately reflects the policy recommendations; however, the following clarification(s) are suggested. (Please provide the suggested language change.)

If B, C, or D, please elaborate.

Newfold Digital supports the statement made by the RrSG in their public comment. Preferred to have had the respective DPAs between ICANN and registrars and registries completed in tandem with providing public comment to the policy language. Encourage ICANN to complete these negotiations.

Please provide your feedback:
Section 6 accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Section 7 accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Section 8 accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Section 9 accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Section 10 accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Section 11 accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Section 12 accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Addendum I accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Addendum II accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Implementation Notes accurately reflect the policy recommendations with no issues.
Please provide your feedback:
Background Section accurately reflects the policy recommendations with no issues.
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the AWIP correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the ERRP correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in all gTLDs Policy correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the CL&D Policy correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the RNAP correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the Revised ICANN Procedure for Handling Whois Conflicts with Privacy Law correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the Thick Whois Transition Policy correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the Transfer FOA Confirmation correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the Transfer FOA Initial Authorization correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the TDRP correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the Transfer Policy correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the UDRP correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the UDRP Rules correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the URS Procedure correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the URS Rules correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the URS Requirements correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the WDRP correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, are the proposed redlined changes identified in the Whois Marketing Restriction Policy correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, is the proposed Advisory Clarifications to the Registry and Registrar Requirements for Whois Data Directory Services correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, is the proposed the RDAP Technical Implementation Guide correct?
Yes
Based on the requirements outlined in the Registration Data Consensus Policy, is the proposed RDAP Response Profile correct?
Yes
Summary of Submission

Newfold Digital, Inc. thanks all current and past members of the IPT and IRT for their work. We believe the Registration Data Policy presented accurately reflects the recommendations but wish for the data processing agreements, recommended to be in place between ICANN and Contracted Parties per the EPDP Phase 1 Final Report, are completed at the earliest.