The note below is disappointing. I'd really like to see the reports on this, because companies with existing, operational registries have a lot to gain by spreading FUD about the difficulties of this process. The background here is that pre-qualification was proposed as a mechanism to level the playing field at the application phase between incumbents and new market entrants. If you are doing away with pre- qualification, how are you going to ensure that new market entrants with the technical wherewithal to run a registry have an equal opportunity to have their application approved? -- Bret On Aug 12, 2008, at 11:43 PM, At-Large Staff wrote:
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. ICANN staff has determined not to proceed with this initiative in the first round of the new gTLD process. 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 community members who expressed the potential positive aspects that creation of the certification might promote.
During the exploration of the initiative, ICANN consulted with the community including technical experts and gTLD and ccTLD registries and registry service providers. Potential operational benefits and risks of implementing the initiative were assessed. Ultimately, a decision was made to not proceed with certification as part of the initial new gTLD application round based upon a number of factors. Some of these are: additional assessment as to effects certification might have on the marketplace, e.g., whether the implementation might cause expansion or contraction; additional collaboration with the community as to the terms of such a certification; and weighing the potential post-certification activities including ongoing testing, re-certification and the introduction of new compliance activities. It was also deemed important to be able to assess the positive and negative aspects of the new gTLD implementation without possible crossover effects of this additional certification. This independence of interactions can be better assured by introducing the certification (if it is deemed appropriate after additional analysis) at a later date.
Both ccTLD and gTLD backend registry operators can still offer to provide registry services to new gTLDs. 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)