Re: [regext] TLD Phase Discovery

Gavin Brown <gavin.brown@centralnic.com> Tue, 15 August 2017 13:42 UTC

Return-Path: <gavin.brown@centralnic.com>
X-Original-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E69D1321BB for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Aug 2017 06:42:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J4r1Wo2siltL for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Aug 2017 06:42:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.centralnic.com (mail-9.bfn.uk.centralnic.net [212.18.250.205]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 045D91324BD for <regext@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Aug 2017 06:42:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MacBookPro.local (unknown [10.9.250.60]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.centralnic.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8CF8DE1675; Tue, 15 Aug 2017 13:42:24 +0000 (UTC)
To: "Gould, James" <jgould@verisign.com>, Thomas Corte <Thomas.Corte@knipp.de>, "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org>
References: <D0517C3D-1E10-472B-B90A-A3A4D4A7AA13@verisign.com>
Cc: "support@tango-rs.com" <support@tango-rs.com>
From: Gavin Brown <gavin.brown@centralnic.com>
Organization: CentralNic
Message-ID: <2320d779-3c0e-3b1e-4d03-d4bc3b11467c@centralnic.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 14:42:20 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <D0517C3D-1E10-472B-B90A-A3A4D4A7AA13@verisign.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="upTemFqfpAlTXL8jAqk9v2e2ic6AuAm1e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/blQe4W5VeNiY0rmPm1qP9WSWpBQ>
Subject: Re: [regext] TLD Phase Discovery
X-BeenThere: regext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions <regext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/regext/>
List-Post: <mailto:regext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 13:42:29 -0000

On 14/08/2017 19:27, Gould, James wrote:

> As a co-author of Launch Phase Mapping going back 5 years and the one that added the “Domain names may be made available only in unique launch phases, whilst remaining unavailable for concurrent launch phases” language to the draft, I’m aware of the intent.  Wil and Gavin can also weigh in on the intent.  The intent was for the launch phases to be associated with the TLD (or zone), where there may be a policy for launch phases that differentiates the availability of domain names.  It was never intended or foreseen that a launch phase would be used to group a set of domain names as a form of fee classification.  We can agree to disagree on this topic. 

I agree with Jim. The Launch Phase was not designed to deal with premium
names: I would not have created the fee extension if it were.

G.

-- 
Gavin Brown
Chief Technology Officer
CentralNic Group plc (LSE:CNIC)
Innovative, Reliable and Flexible Registry Services
for ccTLD, gTLD and private domain name registries
https://www.centralnic.com/

CentralNic Group plc is a company registered in England and Wales with
company number 8576358. Registered Offices: 35-39 Moorgate, London,
EC2R 6AR.