Minutes of the Registrar Advisory Group (RAG) meeting held in Federal Room 2, Level 2, Rydges Auckland, on Thursday, 6 November 2014, 9.30am to 12pm.
Mark Goldfinch (Modica), Kim Lowton (Netregistry Group/MelbourneIT) (by phone), Quintin Russ (SiteHost ), Lee Miller (Voyager/Net24), Maria Brosnan, (Freeparking/WebFarm), Glen Eustace (Godzone), Debbie Monahan (DNCL), Jay Daley (NZRS), Dave Baker (NZRS), David Morrison (NZRS), Dylan Connolly (DNCL), Barry Brailey (DNCL), Steven Heath (DNCL), Campbell Gardiner (DNCL), Josh Cookson (DNCL).
.nz Registrations at the Second Level
DNCL will produce a Reseller version of the communications pack for Registrars to pass on to their resellers. DNCL will also update the Registrar Communicatoins Pack, including conflict 'scenarios' and provide a local copy of the anyname FAQ to Registrars.
Registrars advised their customer service staff have found the anyname.nz site a useful information resource when helping their Registrants, and have appreciated the communications pack that DNCL has made available.
DNCL confirmed that Registrars are free to use the "any" image on their websites or information, though DNCL will not be using the "any" brand after 30 March 2015.
It was suggested that if high profile sites switched to using the .nz version of their name, other Registrants would then want to use theirs. It was acknowledged that it is a lot of work to move to a different domain name.
- Conflicted names
Registrars advised that Conflicted Registrants are unhappy that they can't tell what choices other Conflicted Registrants have made, or even if they have made a choice at all.
DNCL will follow up with Conflicts that have one remaining Registrant, who has not made a choice, and provide a tool for Registrars to use to see if Conflicted Registrants have made a choice, but will not what the choice is, as this may then affect how other conflicted Registrants choose.
DNCL and NZRS will consider providing a list to Registrars showing which of their conflicted Registrants have lodged a conflict preference, as part of the Registrar portal.
RAG advised that a bulk reservation tool will be beneficial, though others advised they are happy to push their customers to the anyname.nz site, as they don't wish to push reservations.
RAG indicated Registrars would like an API to be able to run queries on names to see if preferences have been recorded.
DNCL advised another round of supplying information to trade magazines, etc, will commence during the PRE period.
There are over 400,000 names with PRE rights, the Registrants of these names should be contacted by Registrars to advise them of this. Registrars do not wish to come between their resellers and their registrants, so would like a generic email they could send from DNCL, if resellers are not communicating. DNCL will make one of these.
Posting hard copies to Registrants was brought up, DNCL will think about mailing those who have not been emailed by Registrars.
RAG agreed that acknowledging Resellers is a good thing.
DNCL does not wish to make Registrar-reseller contracts mandatory, but wishes to put wording into policy to define resellers, and plan to send this to the DNCL Board early December and publish a consultation. It is acknowledged by DNCL and RAG that defining a reseller may be difficult.
Registrars mentioned they would like to see something general in the Core Terms and Conditions may also work, DNCL will come up with a clause that Registrars can choose to add to their terms and conditions if they wish.
The general approach to Reseller policy and or contracts was supported by all.
Ideally DNCL wishes to see something in policy to cover Registrars when there is no Registrar-reseller contract, this will be drafted and distriguted to RAG before the DNCL next board meeting.
NZRS said they could have some sort of analysis on resellers, for Registrars to access. RAG advised Registrars would like to be able to put a tag on registrations to indicate a reseller, or any other subject. Dave advised there is already a field they could use for this.
RAG acknowledged some Registrars have problems with Resellers not paying for registrations, DNCL advised the grace period is in place to protect Registrars from non-payment.
- Security standards
RAG does not wish to have mandated security standards, as they feel it would be too much a burden for many Registrars. They would like to see what best practice is, spelled out. Self-assessment can be declared in Registrar authorisation applications.
RAG agreed that Registrars with larger numbers of Registrations may have more conversations regarding security with DNCL, as they may be more likely to suffer attacks due to their size.
DNCL would like to see reporting to DNCL by Registrar when they have security issues or outages in the media, or issues affecting Registrants. This would include non-domain name issues, as then DNCL is able to give information to concerned Registrants who enquire. DNCL confirmed it would not mandate a set timeframe for reporting.
Some Registrars would like to see security issues involve the wider community, such as NZITF, as they felt it is a significantly different to ask for assistance from security organisations, than to declare security issues to their regulator.
In February next year three of the RAG will be randomly selected, and their positions will be up for election. After this three will be up for election each year, with by-elections if someone resigns.
Registrars noted they preferred to have RAG meetings prior to the .nz Registrar conference.
NZRS general update
A very broad update was given to Glen and Kim, as they were not able to attend the conference.
David Morrison advised presentations and recordings of the conference will be online when available.
Quentin brought up the issue of transferring a domain name away from a Registrar who drops the zone instantly, resulting in downtime for the Registrant's domain name related services. He felt it would be beneficial to have best practice about this. DNCL will give though to this, bearing in mind that in the past Registrars have not wanted to be held to higher standards than others, in this case, other DNS providers.