ICANN may not consider Kyrgyz government’s request for KG domain zone administration

[sarcle]

18/11-2009 14:21, Bishkek – News Agency “24.kg”, By Daniyar KARIMOV

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) may not consider Kyrgyz government’s request for delegation of the KG domain zone administration rights, George Sadowsky, member of the ICANN Board of Directors said at the Round Table in Bishkek on Wednesday, November 18.
The speaker was speaking in his personal capacity, not as a member of the ICANN Board. He said that considerable weight has been always given to the views of the local Internet community, and to the extent that the proposed delegation supports the needs of the local community.
In his opinion, the Internet community in a country includes all stakeholders who depend upon the correct functioning of the Internet, including users, ISPs, and providers of various Internet-related services in all sectors: government, business, the technical community, civil society and users of the Internet. In his personal opinion, in general, domain administration by private organizations and NGOs is more likely to satisfy community needs.
“ICANN is neutral with respect to delegation choices in any given country. It does not make policies within countries. Decisions must be made within a country,” he said. Note from the news agency 24.kg – ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) was formed in 1998. It is a not-for-profit public-benefit corporation with participants from all over the world dedicated to keeping the Internet secure, stable and interoperable. It promotes competition and develops policy on the Internet’s unique identifiers.


http://eng.24.kg/community/2009/11/18/9717.html

[Rubber Duck]

http://eng.24.kg/community/2009/11/18/9717.html

If George Sadowsky said that then he is an idiot.

How many Countries did not get a ccTLD in ASCII? And besides, he clearly has read the policy document.


http://www.icann.org/en/topics/idn/fast-track/idn-cctld-implementation-plan-16nov09-en.pdf

2.2 Requester of an IDN ccTLD
The Fast Track Process is divided into three distinct stages, as discussed in more detail in Module 5:
•
Stage 1: Preparation Stage;
•
Stage 2: Request Submission for String Evaluation; and
•
Stage 3: Request Submission for Delegation Evaluation.
The entity acting as the requester, and that submits the request for an IDN ccTLD to ICANN for stage 2, can be the identified IDN ccTLD manager (proposed sponsoring organization), or the relevant government or public authority, or their designated representative.
If the requester is the IDN ccTLD manager (this may be the existing country-code top-level domain manager for the ISO 3166-1 code, or a different entity) or government designated representative, it must have the support from the country or territory corresponding to the relevant ISO 3166-1 entry, and must satisfactorily and clearly document this support. The documentation of support
must evidence support from the relevant government or public authority. This is defined as a signed letter of support, from the Minister with the portfolio responsible for domain name administration, ICT, foreign affairs or Office of the Prime Minister or President; or from a senior representative of the agency or department responsible for domain name administration, ICT, Foreign Affairs or the Office of the Prime Minister.
The letter should clearly express the government or public authority’s support for the request and demonstrate the governments or public authority’s understanding of the string being requested and its intended use. The letter should also demonstrate the governments or public authority understanding that the string is being sought through the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Process and that the requester is willing to accept the conditions under which the string will be available, i.e., as outlined in this Final Implementation Plan.
If there is reason for doubt of the authenticity of the letter, ICANN will consult with the relevant diplomatic authorities or members of the GAC for the government or public authority concerned.
To further assist the requester in determining who the relevant government or public authority may be for a request, the requester may wish to consult with the relevant GAC representative. See http://gac.icann.org/index.php?name=Representatives&mode=4
An example of a support letter is included in Appendix 1 to this Module 2.

[sarcle]

If George Sadowsky said that then he is an idiot.

How many Countries did not get a ccTLD in ASCII?

This was I was wondering. Why would a person in his position say something so stupid as to whether a country could control their ccTLD?

It didn't make any sense to me.

[jacksonm]

dot KG is already delegated to Kyrgyzstan.


http://www.iana.org/domains/root/db/kg.html


.

[sarcle]

dot KG is already delegated to Kyrgyzstan.


http://www.iana.org/domains/root/db/kg.html


.

I believe this is about the IDN equivalent which would be .кг? Which already has something similar .kr for korea. Just guessing.

[jacksonm]

I believe this is about the IDN equivalent which would be .кг? Which already has something similar .kr for korea. Just guessing.


No, it's not about IDN. I found it. It's that a private company has the .kg delegation and the government is trying to take the delegation away from them. The gov wants ICANN to hand over the zone delegation to the gov.

http://www.neweurasia.net/media-and-internet/kg-internet-state-starts-and-wins/


So, they recently held a meeting about it. And we got the very strange, off the record, comments seen above.

Well, honestly, I don't see how ICANN can really refuse to turn over the delegation to the gov. A ccTLD is a national resource.

[sbe18]

turning delegations back to govt's....

is there a history of back and forths....

dot ME....with GoDaddy....

I guess they could demand ICANN to act there..

same with..
dot TV with Tuvalu ../Verisign to Enom....

dot HK, was before the territory returned to PRC sovereignty...
could CNNIC or PRC demand dot HK delegation from ICANN...?
I suppose....but I think ICANN would delay and delay../ ignore it...

but I think ICANN is going with......
we delegated it once to the govt., after that you are on your own....

agreed......on the remarks being off kilter...

s/

[sarcle]

No, it's not about IDN. I found it. It's that a private company has the .kg delegation and the government is trying to take the delegation away from them. The gov wants ICANN to hand over the zone delegation to the gov.

http://www.neweurasia.net/media-and-internet/kg-internet-state-starts-and-wins/



So the Kyrgyz gov. handed over the .kg domain space for a third party to run and now they need Icann to act on their behalf to get it back? That's what I'm getting from this.

Well then it's their own dumbass fault for handing it over in the first place.

[jacksonm]

So the Kyrgyz gov. handed over the .kg domain space for a third party to run and now they need Icann to act on their behalf to get it back? That's what I'm getting from this.

Well then it's their own dumbass fault for handing it over in the first place.


Yeah, I think that pretty much sums up the situation.

[Drewbert]

It's not that simple.

When the Internet blossomed, many governments didn't care, didn't want to get involved, or had no clue.

ccTLD delegations were originally handled by the tech guy at whatever University had taken the lead in that country for Internet routing.

From that point, it just gets messy.

[jacksonm]

turning delegations back to govt's....

is there a history of back and forths....

dot ME....with GoDaddy....

I guess they could demand ICANN to act there..

same with..
dot TV with Tuvalu ../Verisign to Enom....

dot HK, was before the territory returned to PRC sovereignty...
could CNNIC or PRC demand dot HK delegation from ICANN...?
I suppose....but I think ICANN would delay and delay../ ignore it...

but I think ICANN is going with......
we delegated it once to the govt., after that you are on your own....

agreed......on the remarks being off kilter...

s/


There is a really big and fundamental difference between a country having sold the rights to it's ccTLD, and a country trying to gain official control of it's ccTLD which had initially been delegated to some university or private company for use in said country. In the second case, it was never delegated to the gov to begin with - somebody else took the lead and received the delegation. It seems that the procedures at ICANN during the time were fairly lax regarding to whom they handed out ccTLD delegations.

IMO, the only ones who should have the delegations in any country is that country's official government communications agency. Of course, if they want to contract someone to manage it then that's fine, but they still maintain authoritative control, that is "ownership".