Stakeholders Mixed on ICANN Policy Implementation Plan for Labeling 'Thick' WHOIS Data

domain name itself, along with the registrant and other contacts of the domain name. Thin registration data has only data associated with the domain name itself. The revised labeling policy plan ICANN proposed in October doesn't require registries to implement a registration data access protocol (RDAP) service to achieve consistent labeling, which was criticized by the Registry Stakeholder Group (RySG), ICANN said. RySG said it “supports the removal” of the RDAP requirement from the labeling policy plan. RDAP “is outside the scope of the Thick Whois PDP recommendations,” the stakeholder group commented: “The RySG’s concerns with the inclusion of RDAP were compounded by the introduction of a requirement to implement the RDAP in accordance with an Operational Profile that was introduced unilaterally by ICANN staff” in the policy plan. The Internet Architecture Board urged ICANN to remove “all barriers to the deployment and use of RDAP.” The protocol “was developed within the IETF [Internet Engineering Task Force], by technical contributors whose affiliations include registries, registrars, and other WHOIS users and providers, to resolve the technical shortcomings of WHOIS,” IAB said. “Given the well known issues with WHOIS, the IAB strongly encourages ICANN, Registrars, and Registries to begin experimenting with RDAP as soon as possible.” The Generic Names Supporting Organization's IP Constituency (IPC) said it “has no substantive objections” to the revised policy plan but believes the decision to not include the RDAP requirement is "a 180 degree reversal” by ICANN. “While this requirement has been a consistent feature of the CLD [consistent labeling and display] implementation plan throughout the drafting process, ICANN staff completely reversed its position on it within days” of RySG's objection, the IPC wrote. “Wholly apart from the merits of the RySG objections, IPC empathizes with its frustrations regarding staff unresponsiveness. IPC will certainly bear this precedent in mind the next time the ICANN staff fails to heed IPC’s well-considered and repeatedly-voiced objections to a proposed course of action.” Verisign urged ICANN to include provisions in the labeling policy plan to allow extensions to the plan's Aug. 1, 2017, effective date. “It is possible for legitimate issues to arise during the implementation of the [CLD] Policy (include security and stability concerns) which may impact the ability of Registry Operators to comply with the” effective date, the company commented.