For those of you interested in redelegation, as well as any other processes which IANA is responsible for, we recommend the IANA Introductory Briefing next week - see the calendar on atlarge.icann.org for full details <advertisement mode off> On 22/09/2008 18:12, "Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@blacknight.ie> wrote: On 22 Sep 2008, at 16:45, Baher Esmat wrote:

...

-----Original Message----- From: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large- bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Michele Neylon :: Blacknight Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 5:23 PM To: At-Large Worldwide Subject: [At-Large] ccTLD Redelegation

Is there a clearly defined process for redelegating a ccTLD?

IANA's procedure for ccTLD redelegation is described at: http://iana.org/domains/root/delegation-guide/

Regards, Baher

Baher Thanks :) Why would the US dept. of Commerce be involved with the re-delegation of a sovereign state's TLD? Michele

...

Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 US: 213-233-1612 UK: 0844 484 9361 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge- lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 US: 213-233-1612 UK: 0844 484 9361 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845 _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA DD: +1 (310) 578-8637 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart@icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

NB. Pour france@large (qui n'exite pas :-)) désolé du franglais mais nous sommes au coeur du problème que doit résoudre l'establishment Internet US. Il ne s'agit plus du poids des dollars, mais des principes architecturaux de la gouvernance qu'ils ont éjà signé. --- At 21:22 22/09/2008, John Levine wrote:

...

Why would the US dept. of Commerce be involved with the re-delegation of a sovereign state's TLD?

ICANN operates IANA under a contract with the USDOC. I realize that there are people who wish it were otherwise, but that's the structure that exists today, and the USDOC has made it quite clear that it's not going to change any time soon.

Thank you John for clarifying. As you understand this US _foreign_ interference is in contradiction with the GAC principles, the WSIS unanimous (including the USG) declarations and the most obvious interest of the non-US citizen @large and netizens whose are reprsented by their own governments, public administrations, private sector, civil society, participation to international organisations and normative, standardization and R&D community. The Tunis Declaration has decided how such a situation is to be addressed, in transitionning from the existing Legacy Internet to the emergent future internet through enhanced cooperations, gathering ICANN, the NTIA, the Internet Community, including @large structures as well as all their foreign counter parts. It is a major concern that the exploration of the enhanced cooperation mecanism is slowed down on by Internet Legacy main stakeholders, for short term reasons the IAB has well described in RFC 3869. This is a situation where ALAC must advise the ICANN BoD in the best ICANN, Internet community, national and users' interests. This was the intent of france@large in joining the ALAC. france@large accreditation denial (still not notified so we cannot appeal) was most probably a way for some to delay the discussion of this topic (while it is the real core of the post JPA organisation, due to the USDOC strategy you perfectly document - even if you do not quote the DNSSEC additional bluff). Actually, it speeded-it up, since we did not have to go through an ALAC process. This is why, after concerting with many @large and IETF community Members, I introduced http://www.ietf.org/IESG/APPEALS/appeal-morfin-ml-dns.txt . Its purpose is to clarify with the IESG and IAB the technical and architecural implications of the current enhanced cooperation process delays. This is certainly the most urgent issue for ICANN and ccTLD "redelegation", since it concerns the way Govs are going to continue using the IANA or technically by-pass it and move ahead. The target is to find the way to best prevent the DNS and Internet balkanization these disrespect of the WSIS resolutions, and technical disregard of the network architectural multilingualisation constraints, lead to. There are three options : (1) a positive evolution of the IETF from its current RFC 3935 (decentralised, anglocentric, doctrinal) thinking, towards the complex system thinking the Internet requires and many @large sicentists, academics, engineers, searchers are used to their own trades, (2) a cooperation through the IAB, an IETF dedicated WG, or other forms of cooperation as suggested by some politics and IETF, or (3) an IGF enhanced cooperation for open network standards that would most probably be @large originated. It is now to the IESG/IAB to decide in the coming two months. To understand why this is a determining issue for ICANN and USG, just think how surprising it is that no one in ten years - at ICANN/IETF has ever requested a scientific/mathematic study concerning the (im)possibility to support the Unicode denser continuity through the punycode lower discontinuity. Is there a scientist around? Sometimes ago they asked the NSA, but did they read the report? I am sure David Clark. As other GENI fellows did. jfc

I hope the information Roberto received was accurate, but notwithstanding my distaste for the final step of redelegation(USG approval), I should say that in all fairness the first six steps of redelegation process have been very helpful in establishing stability and preventing arbitrary and frequent redelegations. Time was when with any change of government in some countries a minor or major officer of telecommunications ministry decided to attempt a redelegation. The lengthy process has helped usher in due process and systematization of ccTLD-Govt relations in many countries. In the final analysis, the governments always have the power to bring about a change of ccTLD operator, but the process gives them an opportunity to pause and ponder. Siavash, .IR ccTLD

...

ICANN operates IANA under a contract with the USDOC. I realize that there are people who wish it were otherwise, but that's the structure that exists today, and the USDOC has made it quite clear that it's not going to change any time soon.

OTOH, for the sake of completeness, it should also be mentioned that up to now there has been no interference by USDOC. About a year ago I had a discussion with the then Undersecretary John Kneuer, head of the NTIA, and he pointed out that USG has not even opposed the delegation of the ccTLD for North Korea, which shows that their approach is rather "hands off". Of course, this does not mean that they are prepared to relinquish their role in the approval chain.

Cheers, Roberto

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

On 22 Sep 2008, at 20:22, John Levine wrote:

...

Why would the US dept. of Commerce be involved with the re-delegation of a sovereign state's TLD?

ICANN operates IANA under a contract with the USDOC. I realize that there are people who wish it were otherwise, but that's the structure that exists today, and the USDOC has made it quite clear that it's not going to change any time soon.

John Thanks for the clarification I was aware of their influence over gTLDs but hadn't grasped their potential influence over ccTLDs Regards Michele Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection http://www.blacknight.com/ http://blog.blacknight.com/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 US: 213-233-1612 UK: 0844 484 9361 Locall: 1850 929 929 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763 ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland Company No.: 370845