Re: [registrars] RGP Bug - Steps for a proposed fix

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>]

> > it seems that important details were not communicated or
> > appropriately understood by this constituency.

> As a member of the committee that developed the broad
> outlines for a redemption grace period, I think the
> committee report was communicated widely.  But often
> the "devil is in the detail".  We did not see the final
> requirements document before development for example.

Ahh...yes. As with my message as well - I had intended to write "...it seems
that important details were *either* not communicated or appropriately
understood by this constituency. Apologies if the omission sent the wrong
message.

> (starting with a discussion with the registries, and then getting
> ICANN endorsement) to fix the bug.  From an engineering
> point of view - now is the time to submit a change request.
> The meeting in Washington is a good forum for this to start.

Agreed - we need to ensure that the right people are at the table and can
work towards a collaborative solution that we can all stand behind. This
means getting first hand input and answers from all key stakeholders -
registries, registrars and the ICANN staff that sort out the contractual
details.

> Also with any change a built in review should be considered.
> e.g 3 months after implementation to consider any further
> changes.

Agreed.

Regards,

                -rwr