Domain Empire

IDN TLD Allocation Implementation Processes

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch
Impact
18
IDN TLD Allocation Implementation Processes

20 August 2008

Following the progress on the IDN TLD allocation processes during the ICANN meeting in Paris a new area has been made available to describe IDN policy development and IDN ccTLD allocation developments under ICANN’s IDN Area: http://icann.org/en/topics/idn.

At the Paris meeting, the Board approved both of the processes described below for implementation.

In relation to the IDN ccTLD "fast track" process it was resolved that the Board directs staff to: "(1) post the IDNC WG final report for public comments; (2) commence work on implementation issues in consultation with relevant stakeholders; and (3) submit a detailed implementation report including a list of any outstanding issues to the Board in advance of the ICANN Cairo meeting in November 2008."

Fast-track IDN ccTLD Activities

On a related note, the ICANN Board also adopted "the GNSO policy recommendations for the introduction of new gTLDs. And further that the Board directs staff to continue to further develop and complete its detailed implementation plan, continue communication with the community on such work, and provide the Board with a final version of the implementation proposals for the board and community to approve before the new gTLD introduction process is launched."

New gTLD Program


Fast-track IDN ccTLD Activities
Fast-track IDN ccTLD Activities

The IDNC working group, whose formation was approved by the ICANN Board during the ICANN meeting in Los Angeles, finished their recommendations to create a fast track approach to introduce a limited number of IDN ccTLDs. The IDNC working group final report was approved by the ICANN Board during the ICANN Paris meeting, where the ICANN Board also directed ICANN staff to commence implementation of this process.

The fast-track process focuses on meeting a near-term demand and on gaining experience with the implementation of a limited number of IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes (IDN ccTLDs). In developing their recommendations the IDNC working group paid special attention to:

The overarching requirement to preserve the security and stability of the DNS;
Compliance with the IDNA protocols;
Input and advice from the technical community in respect to the implementation of IDNs;
Current practices for the delegation of ccTLDs
With the approval of the IDNC Final Report by the ICANN Board of Directors, ICANN is now at a transition point, focusing on developing implementable solutions to the IDNC recommendations. This page is intended to be a central location for resources relating to fast-track IDN ccTLDs. As this transition from policy development to implementation moves forward, this page will present up-to-date information. Suggestions for other resources and information to be included on this page can be submitted to [email protected].

The IDNC working group list of members and charter is available at http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idncwg.htm

News and Announcements

15 Jul: Following the ICANN Board instructions the IDNC final report for fast-track IDN ccTLDs is posted for public comments until 15 August 2008
26 June 2008: The ICANN Board approved the IDNC final report for fast-track IDN ccTLDs, at the Paris ICANN meeting. Staff will continue to work on implementation of the recommendations and operational readiness. (26 June 2008)
22 June 2008: Update of Draft Final Report of IDNC WG on Fast Track Process for IDN ccTLDs Now Available
13 June 2008: Draft Final Report of Recommendations for IDN ccTLD Fast Track Mechanism Made Available
31 March 2008: Discussion Draft of Interim Report of IDNC WG for Public Comments
1 February 2008: Draft Initial Report of IDNC WG for Comment
22 January 2008: Letter to the ICANN Board on gNSO Resolution regarding a fast-track for IDN ccTLDs
5 December 2007: IDN Survey Results
15 October 2007: Resolutions on IDN Issues from Council call 02 October 2007
5 October 2007: Letter to ccTLD Managers about IDN ccTLDs
9 July 2007: ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Policy Issues
26 June 2007: ISSUES PAPER: Selection of IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 two letter codes (final version)
19 June 2007: ISSUES PAPER: Selection of IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 two letter codes (draft version 2)


New gTLD Program
New gTLD Program

Introducing new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) is central to fostering choice and competition in domain registration services, and as such is significant to the promotion of ICANN’s core values. The evolution of the namespace towards an enhanced diversity of services and service providers must be planned and managed effectively to preserve the security, stability, and global interoperability of the Internet.
The proposed policy to guide the introduction of new gTLDs was created by the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) through its bottom-up, multi-stakeholder policy development process. The elements addressed in the development of the new gTLD policy involve technical, economic, operational, legal, public policy, and other considerations. The intended result is a straightforward, fair, and efficient process for allocating new gTLDs.
With the approval of the GNSO Policy Development Process (PDP) by the ICANN Board of Directors, ICANN is now at a transition point, focusing on developing implementable solutions to the GNSO recommendations. This page is intended to be a central location for resources relating to new gTLDs. As this transition from policy to implementation moves forward, this page will present up-to-date information. Suggestions for other resources and information to be included on this page can be submitted to [email protected] .

News and Announcements
Policy development updates:
  • The ICANN Board approved the GNSO PDP at the Paris ICANN meeting. Staff will continue to work on implementation of the recommendations and operational readiness. (26 June 2008)
  • The Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) completed its policy development work on new gTLDs and approved a set of recommendations, by a supermajority vote, at its meeting on 6 September 2007.
Program implementation development updates:
ICANN continues to develop potential implementation models of the GNSO Policy recommendations for the introduction of New gTLDs.
  • Auctions - ICANN is considering the use of auctions as a tie-breaking mechanism within the new gTLD process, in some cases where there is more than one qualified applicant for the same TLD string. ICANN is posting a paper [PDF, 52K] for community discussion, entitled The Economic Case for Auctions, which explores the potential benefits of auctions as a tie-breaking mechanism. The paper lays out a number of questions on which ICANN is seeking community feedback, and the comment forum is open through 7 September 2008 23:59 UTC (8 August 2008).
  • String Similarity Algorithm - ICANN staff recently completed a workshop with SWORD, the partner who is assisting ICANN with the creation of an algorithm that will help automate the process for assessing similarity among proposed and existing TLD strings. SWORD's verbal search algorithms are used by various patent and trademark offices throughout the world. SWORD has completed a beta algorithm and reviewed several test cases with ICANN staff. This is being done in order to refine the parameters and discuss how the algorithm could be successfully integrated as a tool to help implement the GNSO's recommendation that new gTLD strings should not result in user confusion with existing TLDs (8 August 2008).
  • Backend Registry Certification Not Available in First Round - On 31 January 2008, ICANN posted an announcement (http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-31jan08.htm) to inform the community that it was exploring a potential initiative for the certification of backend registry operators for new gTLDs. The initiative was suggested as a possible means to streamline the application process for new gTLDs and to create a pool of pre-qualified registry operators who could provide assistance in the event of a registry failure. Exploration of the initiative was also prompted by inquiries from a range of community members who expressed that creation of the certification would promote competition for technical services providers. During the exploration of the initiative, ICANN consulted with the community including technical experts and gTLD and ccTLD registries and registry service providers. ICANN assessed the operational benefits and risks of implementing the initiative. Ultimately, ICANN made a business decision not to proceed with certification as part of the opening new gTLD application round based upon a number of factors including, but not limited to: pre-existing operating plan commitments and priorities; time and resources required to develop and implement prior to the launch of new gTLDs; and, resource requirements associated with post-certification activities including ongoing testing, re-certification and the introduction of new compliance activities.
    For ccTLD backend registry operators who may have thought they could not compete for providing registry services to new gTLDs, this is not the case. The Request for Proposals for new gTLDs when published will detail the minimum technical criteria and pre-delegation check requirements that must be met by every applicant prior to the approval of their TLD for insertion into the root. New gTLD applicants might choose to build their own registry infrastructure and systems, retain the services of an existing gTLD or ccTLD registry services provider, or contract with another technical services provider (8 August 2008).
  • ICANN staff has selected developers to build the TLD Application System (TAS) and to develop a visual similarity algorithm. The main business requirements have been indentified and development work should begin soon. TAS is the web-based system to be used to receive and manage incoming new gTLD applications. The algorithm will help to identify new gTLD applications that may be identical or too similar to co-exist in the namespace with existing TLDs, reserved names, or other applied for TLDs. (18 June 2008)
  • At the request of the ICANN Board during the Delhi Meeting, the GNSO and ICANN staff met in Los Angeles on April 10 and 11 2008 to discuss progress made in implementing GNSO recommendation. Complete agenda and presentation materials from the face-to-face meetings are available at http://gnso.icann.org/. (18June2008)
  • ICANN staff has selected Power Auctions LLC as ICANN's auction design consultant for various auction needs, including (1) the development of models for the resolution of contention among applicants for new generic TLD strings, (2) for the disposition of data from failed registrars or registries, and 3) for the allocation of SC SLDs. (June 13 2008)
  • Background Information Regarding Previous New GTLD Application Rounds. (13 February 2008)
  • Public Comments Requested on DNS Stability: the effect of New gTLDs on the Internet Domain Name System In preparing for the expected implementation of the gTLD policy recommendations, staff is conducting some review and analysis of the technical issues involved in this development. The addition of gTLDs to the namespace is an expansion of the DNS on a potentially large scale, to include many more names at the top level. ICANN is publishing a paper called DNS Stability: the effect of New gTLDs on the Internet Domain Name System [PDF, 53K] to solicit informed input on the technical issues relevant to the addition of new gTLDs, and to provide transparency toward how it will interpret and implement this recommendation. The goal is a clear set of rules that will be available to potential new gTLD applicants; so that it is known from the outset what tests will be applied to each application.Comments can be viewed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/new-gtlds-dns-stability/. (6 February 2008)
Previous Updates
Resources
Events
Upcoming
Recent
 
0
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the page’s height.
Back