Hi John > On 23/09/2016, at 7:52 AM, John Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote: > > In article <83c4fe76-52e8-48ed-b6c2-0691555d3...@icann.org> you write: >> I think there are two parts to your question. First, the Registry >> Stakeholder Group (RySG) request for reconsideration that triggered this >> proposal; >> perhaps someone else in this list (from the RySG) can speak to that. > > I took a look at the request and I read it as saying that RDAP would > cost money, and if it turns out that the final RDAP spec is different, > they'll have to spend even more money. I didn't see any compelling > technical issues. Needless to say, registries deeply resent anything > that requires them to spend money, particularly the new gTLDs whose > business plans are imploding.
It’s not about the money, that’s a red-herring as is the subsequent thread on this point. The reasons given are clearly stated: <<This policy implementation improperly conflates the Consistent Labeling and Display (CL&D) Policy with ICANN’s request for registry operators to implement a new standard for registration data display. In addition, ICANN’s request to implement the new standard includes a requirement to adopt a staff-developed operational profile and an additional requirement that registry operators update their reporting to ICANN; neither of these requirements are permitted by ICANN’s agreements with affected registry operators. We therefore seek the following relief: ● All references to the implementation of the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) be removed from the CL&D Policy; and ● The requirements for registry operators to adopt ICANN’s operational profile and update their reporting be removed from ICANN’s request for implementation of RDAP.>> Jay -- Jay Daley Chief Executive NZRS Ltd desk: +64 4 931 6977 mobile: +64 21 678840 linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/jaydaley _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
