Dear Patrik,
Many thanks for your letter!
see my answers below.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 10:10 AM Patrik Fältström <paf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 18 Aug 2022, at 7:59, John C Klensin wrote:
> (3) Or if, as I believe one of your recent notes suggested,
> those alternative addresses are strictly a matter between the registrar and registrant, that raises two other questions.
> First, if a registrar is in need of the information to
> adequately communicate with the registrant, why isn't the
> registry and those with legitimate access to registry databases?
Don't forget two (more) things:
- We can not allow new registrar-registrant issues increase trouble for the registrant to transfer a domain from one registrar to another.
Well... From my point of view (being a registrar for a while), it's a registrar's responsibility to reflect the changes in the registry technical policy in its software.
- A registrant is doing business with one or more registrars, and a registrar make business with one or more registries (for the same registrant). We do not need more diversity between registries and registrars, we need less. The more similar rules the registries have, the easier it is for the registrant to register their favourite label in more than one TLD. And the more freedom (and difference) in the interface between registry and registrar (the "e" in "epp"), the more complicated it is for the registrar to explain and implement the differences to and on behalf of the registrant. It is already too hard I think. Registries view is that they have many registrants. In the real world, a registrant use multiple registries.
Well...
End users hardly feel the difference between registry, registrar, anr registrar's reseller. They have a service company that provides smth they need, and find out that there is some difference only when smth happens to their domain.
These companies, in turn, encapsulate the difference between registries' requirements in their software. It's their burden - and they get money for that. They may collect extra data, may provide some extra services - but serving as the registrar is their burden.
I agree that we need less diversity between registries - but at least this diversity is inevitable until countries exist :)
I agree that we need less diversity between registries - but at least this diversity is inevitable until countries exist :)
If we try to provide uniform requirements, I'm not sure we should do it via preventing/limiting usage of non-ASCII email, speaking about this case.
SY, Dmitry Belyavsky
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
