Re/Delegation Guidelines for ccTLD Managers


A working document of the Best Practices and Redelegation Working Group of the ccTLD Constituency of the DNSO, part of ICANN

June 18, 2000
Version 2.0, for comment by ccTLD Constituency

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction

Background

Note on Government Involvement in the Administration of a ccTLD

1. Definitions
2. Principles
3. General Guidelines
4. Complaint Procedure

4.1 Complaint Procedure
4.2 Types of complaints
4.3 Complaints of violations of technical operations
4.4 Complaints of violations of non-technical operations
4.4.1 Cure of Complaint
4.4.2 Failure to Cure

5. Mediation
6. Redelegation Proceedings

6.1 ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body

6.1.1 Membership and Formation of the ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body

6.2 Redelegation Principles

6.3 ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body Processes

6.3.1 Deliberations
6.3.2 Criteria
6.3.3 Decisions and Voting
6.3.4 Access to Records

6.4 Appeals

7. Redelegation Implementation

Introduction

As the Internet becomes a mainstream medium for education and commerce, andas domain names have acquired value as a means of identification on theInternet, the responsibility and authority to manage top-level domains hasbecome a question of hot dispute. Prodded by the United States Departmentof Commerce, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), and a host ofother organizations and individuals, the Internet Corporation for AssignedNames and Numbers (ICANN) was formed to ensure the stability of theInternet, a bottom-up process for instituting change, and the prevention ofabuse of monopoly powers.

During the term of its exercise of powers, ICANN has concentrated itsefforts on bringing reliability and openness to the generic top-level domainspace. Meanwhile, controversy continues in the country-code top-leveldomain space. In the spirit of the ICANN mandate for self-regulation, theCountry-Code Top-Level Domain Constituency (ccTLD Constituency) of theDomain Name Supporting Organization (DNSO) of ICANN declares its intentionto settle controversies over the authority to manage country-code top-leveldomains using the principles and procedures set forth in this document.

Background

Starting in 1985, ccTLD managers received delegations to administer ccTLDsfrom IANA, or from Dr. Jon Postel as IANA's chief, based on informalcriteria. Generally these managers were recognized as being an Internetauthority within the territory described by the ccTLD code, either becauseof their technical expertise, their renown in the global Internet community,or because of their standing within Internet community in the relevantterritory. In 1994, Dr. Postel and others authored RFC 1591, which laid outcriteria for the delegation of a ccTLD to a manager, and on this basis, allfurther ccTLDs were delegated to their managers. In either case, the twofoundation stones of the delegation of any ccTLD from IANA to its managerwere the stability of the technical functioning of the delegated zone, andservice to the Internet community, both local and global. These dual tasksremain the major responsibilities of ccTLD managers to this day and into theforeseeable future.

In 1998, IANA was merged into the newly formed ICANN, and its tasks weresubsumed under ICANN's larger remit. Due in part to the divergence betweenthe principles of RFC 1591 on the one hand, and the practice of IANA on theother, the ICANN staff at its Berlin meeting in March of 1999 promulgatedIPC-1, which set out the current practice of IANA. Since that time, RFC1591 and IPC-1, taken together, have been the documents from which ccTLDmanagers have, at least officially, taken their instructions.

In reality, however, the source of authority for ccTLD operations was Dr.Postel personally. His untimely death in 1998 left a void that ICANN,occupied with its main task of opening up the gTLD namespace to competition,has not filled. Nor has ICANN garnered the trust from ccTLD managers thatDr. Postel enjoyed. In his last years, Dr. Postel was also much occupiedwith the gTLD fracas; and he did not turn his attention much to ccTLDs,which were largely stable and whose problems were not as troublesome to him.As a practical matter, therefore, ccTLDs have been largely self-regulatedfor some time, with largely positive but not unmixed results. On the onehand, most ccTLD managers have established themselves institutionally in amanner that has met with widespread, if not unanimous, approval both fromthe global and local Internet communities. These managers have solicitedtheir government, Internet service providers, business groups, educationalinstitutions, consumer advocates and others for advice, and have wonapproval and consent from these and other elements of their local Internetcommunity. These ccTLDs, heeding local conditions and customs, have evolvedinto vital Internet institutions organically, achieving a local consensusthat could not, in all probability, have been achieved by decrees from IANA,however well-intentioned. These success stories point the way forward.On the other hand, IANA delegated some ccTLDs to managers who have not yetsuccessfully achieved consensus within the local Internet community, or havenot performed their task to the satisfaction of IANA. The causes vary:opposition to the policies of the manager; lack of an identifiable localInternet community with which the manager can successfully engage,particularly in underdeveloped territories; and the destabilizing influenceof the potential for huge profits, which has led some ccTLD managers topursue unpopular policies, and, with equal harm, has led others to challengethe legitimacy of the ccTLD manager in hopes of obtaining the delegation fortheir own profit.

In certain cases, the mismanagement of a ccTLD may require the replacementof a ccTLD manager, known as redelegation. As defined by the ccTLDConstituency's Best Practice Guidelines. In these Guidelines, thesuccessful performance of a ccTLD manager depends on itsapproval andacceptance of the local and global Internet communities, as well as thecompetent fulfillment of the technical operations of the ccTLD . Thisdocument outlines the steps and procedures to be followed in the case whereredelegation of the ccTLD is contemplated.

 

Note on Government Involvement in the Administration of a ccTLD

The role of governments in the administration of ccTLDs has been the subjectof considerable debate and rancor in various venues within ICANN andwithout, as well as the source of uncertainty and doubt among ccTLDmanagers.

It is important to note that the local Internet community includes, and mustinclude, the government of the territory associated with the country code ofthe ccTLD, and a government's wishes with respect to a ccTLD must be givenvery serious weight, both by the incumbent ccTLD manager and by the globalInternet community. Governments, be they good, bad, or indifferent,represent a territory's interest in the world arena; and governments, withdiffering results, are responsible for providing the healthy economic,social, and political environment, which allows for the stable operation ofany enterprise.

It is equally important, however, to shield a ccTLD manager from shiftingpolitical winds. The stability of the ccTLD, which is the primaryresponsibility of the ccTLD manager, must be protected from whimsicalpersonal interference by political figures; from distraction by moneymakingschemes backed by political influence, and from disenfranchisement andeconomic loss due to changes in government. The will of the government mustbe expressed in a way that makes it clear that it is the will of thegovernment, and not of one or more individuals within a government.The smooth functioning of a ccTLD is part of the smooth functioning of theInternet as a whole. The stability of the ccTLD is part of the stability ofthe Internet as a whole. Therefore, the actions of a government, withrespect to a ccTLD, cannot be viewed as uniquely local actions; nor can agovernment be viewed as the sole interest that the ccTLD serves. A ccTLDbelongs to the local Internet community, of which the government is a part;but also to the global Internet community.

The government of a territory is, indirectly, given substantial power over accTLD in that the administrative contact for the ccTLD is required by RFC1591 and IPC-1 to reside in that territory, and is thus subject to its laws.

 

1. Definitions

ccTLD - A country code top level domain in the top level of the globaldomain name system, assigned according to the two-letter codes in the ISO3166-1 standard codes for the representation of names of countries orterritories.

ccTLD Registry - The entity which records names as domain names in aregister of domain names for the country-code top level domain name,according to policies and rules established by the ccTLD manager inconsultation with the local and global Internet communities, and conformingto the Best Practice Guidelines established by the ccTLD community.ccTLD Manager - A company, organisation or individual managing a ccTLDRegistry.

Registrant - A company, organisation or individual for whom a name has beenregistered as a domain name in the ccTLD domain name register.ICANN - Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.IANA - Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (incorporated into ICANN in1999).

Local Internet Community - The Internet industry and users (e.g. theeducational community, the private sector, Internet societies, individualusers, et al.), and the government and authorities of the state or territorywith which the ccTLD is associated.

ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body - a Body, as further defined in this document,which will function as a panel to adjudicate disputes concerning themanagement of a ccTLD or the right to manage a ccTLD.

 

2. Principles

    • ccTLD managers operate within a self-regulating environment, within theICANN framework

    • ccTLDs are managed for the benefit of the local and global Internet communities, and are responsible to those communities

    • ccTLD managers require certainty and stability in ccTLD delegations

    • Any party who is dissatisfied with the performance of a ccTLD manager has the right to a venue where its complaint will be heard and considered.

    • Redelegation of a ccTLD, or replacement of a ccTLD manager, is appropriate in the case of death or dissolution of the ccTLD manager; voluntary relinquishment of duties by the incumbent ccTLD manager; or because of non-performance of ccTLD managerial duties, and only after a fair and open process as described in this document

    • No ccTLD manager shall be replaced, and no redelegation of a ccTLD shall occur, without a showing of non-performance, and without an opportunity by the ccTLD manager to rectify any deficiencies

    • The role of IANA with respect to ccTLDs is to assure the technical stability of all ccTLD operations, and to facilitate and implement codes of conduct as established by the ccTLD constituency

    • The mandate for a redelegation comes jointly from the local Internet community and the IANA, as these two bodies - per the Best Practices Guidelines established by the ccTLD Constituency - are similarly the source of the mandate under which a ccTLD manager operates a ccTLD.

    • All parties involved in disputes need to know that their point of view will be fairly heard

3. General Guidelines

Any consideration of redelegation of a ccTLD, or replacement of a ccTLDmanager, must stem from a complaint about poor performance by a manager.Therefore, any redelegation action should occur only after these steps arefollowed:

a. Complaint

b. Opportunity for the ccTLD Manager to resolve or cure the cause of the complaint, or to give notice that it considers the complaint to be of no merit

c. Mediation

d. Formal redelegation proceedings

 

4. Complaint Procedure

4.1 Complaint Procedure

Any party having dealings with a ccTLD may lodge a complaint with the IANAconcerning the behavior of the ccTLD Manager.

4.2 Types of complaints

Any complaint concerning the performance of a ccTLD manager shall fall intoone of two categories:

4.2.1 Complaints concerning the technical operation of the ccTLD

4.2.2 Complaints concerning the non-technical administration of the ccTLD, including complaints about the policy or procedures of a ccTLD

4.3 Complaints of violations of technical operations

In the case where a complaint is lodged concerning the technical operationof a ccTLD, and the IANA considers that the alleged violation threatens thestability of the DNS, the IANA may move to enforce its technical standardsimmediately, including the temporary suspension of operations of the ccTLD.Such suspension may only be undertaken as a temporary measure, and may becontinued only as long as the IANA determines that lifting the suspensionwould constitute a threat to the smooth operation of the DNS.

4.4 Complaints of violations of non-technical operations

If the IANA considers that the complaint of an alleged non-technicalviolation is serious, and that it violates the Best Practices Guidelinesestablished by the ccTLD Constituency, it shall inform the ccTLDConstituency of the complaint in writing, and it may contact the ccTLDManager and ask for an explanation. The ccTLD Constituency may advise IANAin the matter. A showing that the ccTLD management has not and will notoperate the domain according to the desires of the local Internet community,if such desires are consistent with the Best Practice Guidelines, shall besufficient to establish that the complaint is serious.

4.4.1 Cure of Complaint. If the IANA, having asked a ccTLD manager for anexplanation of an apparent violation, finds the explanation inadequate, orif the IANA receives a complaint of a serious violation of the BestPractices and Guidelines that requires immediate action, IANA may instructthe ccTLD Manager to fix the problem. IANA shall issue such instructions inwriting, and shall suggest a course of action to rectify the violation.

4.4.2 Failure to Cure. If the ccTLD Manager refuses to cure a violation, ordoes not cure a violation, the IANA shall issue written notice that theManager is in violation of the Best Practices Guidelines. Such writtennotice shall be sufficient cause, at IANA's discretion, in consultation withthe ccTLD Constituency, to initiate Mediation, as described below. NeitherIANA or ICANN shall take any action to redelegate the domain or replace theccTLD Manager without first undertaking Mediation and Redelegationproceedings.

5. Mediation

If, in the face of serious and persistent violations, a ccTLD continues toviolate the Best Practices Guidelines, the Local Internet Community maychallenge the delegation of the ccTLD to the ccTLD manager and may requestthat the manager be replaced.

In such an event, IANA shall attempt to mediate the dispute. It shall bethe policy of IANA to insist that significant parties to a dispute over themanagement of a ccTLD engage in good faith attempts to consult with eachother in constructive ways to resolve disputes relating to the management ofthe ccTLD, including independent third-party mediation where appropriate.The goal of mediation shall be to have the parties better understand thelegitimate desires, intentions, and activities of the other party, and tohave the parties agree to adjust their policies and practices wherenecessary to accommodate reasonable interests of the other parties.It shall be the goal of mediation to educate all the parties as to the bestpractices in the Internet Community and to the methods of conforming suchbest practices to the circumstances of the particular ccTLD. The primarygoal of the mediation shall be to bring the operation of a ccTLD intocompliance with the Best Practices Guidelines, which include operating thedomain according to the wishes of the local Internet community. compliancewith the desires of the local Internet community, where such wishes areconsistent with the Best Practice Guidelines.

IANA shall keep written records of any mediation, for use, if necessary, inredelegation proceedings.

Upon a showing that such good-faith efforts have been undertaken, butwithout satisfactory resolution of the dispute, IANA will invoke the disputeresolution mechanism described below. The ultimate sanction of redelegationshall only be considered after exhausting alternative avenues of bringingthe ccTLD into compliance with the Best Practices Guidelines.

6. Redelegation Proceedings

In the event that good-faith attempts at mediation fail,IANA will invokeformal redelegation proceedings.

6.1 ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body

Redelegation proceedings shall be conducted by the ccTLD Dispute ResolutionBody, which shall adopt procedures that guarantee an open and fair processfor all parties, including open hearings with the right to have meaningfulreview in advance of all evidence to be presented in the proceedings, topresent evidence in writing and through witnesses, and to confront witnessespresenting evidence adverse to a party.

6.1.1 Membership and Formation of the ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body

The ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body will consist of a panel of seven members.Members shall be appointed as follows:

a) One member appointed by the Local Internet Community

b) One member appointed by the government of the territory associated with the country code of the ccTLD

c) One member appointed by the ccTLD Constituency

d) One member appointed by the ccTLD Manager

e) Two members appointed by IANA

f) One member, chosen by IANA, who shall be a "trusted third party." IANAshall attempt to find a person who is a renowned figure with experience indispute resolution, who has no involvement with the either the territory inquestion, or the ccTLD manager.

6.2 Redelegation Principles

The principles below, framed as questions, must be taken into account beforethe ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body releases any decision:

a) Is the ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body's decision likely to cause or sustain a fundamental injustice?

b) Will the decision disadvantage the local or global Internet community to a greater degree than any perceived advantage that might accrue from its implementation?

c) Will the decision breach the law in the country in question?

d) Will the decision threaten the stability of the DNS?

6.3 ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body Processes

6.3.1 Deliberations

The ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body shall meet to deliberate, either in personor by other means that are acceptable to panel members and to thedisputants. In the course of its deliberations, the ccTLD DisputeResolution Body shall:

a) Request from the IANA a written record of all previous proceedings concerning the debate, which IANA shall provide

b) Keep a written record of all of its proceedings

c) Introduce into the record all communications with the disputants and with other parties with whom it communicates in connection with its fact-finding activities and its deliberations, and note in the record any communications, solicited or unsolicited, that it receives from third parties

d) Attempt to gather all relevant information, as an affirmative duty

e) Accord to each side in the dispute an opportunity to present evidence and witnesses in support of its case

6.3.2 Criteria

The ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body must consider the following criteria,among any others it deems suitable:

a) The manager's adherence to the Best Practice Guidelines, or other Internet standards

b) The manager's track record with the local Internet (user) community

c) The legal basis for the original delegation to the current manager

d) Whether the manager is abusing a dominant position in the marketplace

e) Whether an acceptable alternative to the current manager exists. An alternative candidate should:

1) Have a structure or process to guarantee that a future situation of monopolistic abuse will not come about

2) Have access to the technology to operate a ccTLD in a manner that assures the stable operation of the DNS

3) Be financially viable

4) Be acceptable to the local and global Internet communities

6.3.3 Decisions and Voting

In the interests of continuing stability, the ccTLD Dispute Resolution Bodyshall strive to reach a unanimous decision following its deliberations. Ifa unanimous decision is not possible, however, any decision shall require atleast an affirmative majority of two-thirds of all members, includingnon-voting members.

The ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body may reach one of the following decisions:

a) The current ccTLD manager retains the delegation

b) The ccTLD is redelegated to the alternative proposed by the complainant

c) Either of the above with modifications to the approach of the complainant's alternative or the existing manager,

d) Such restrictions and conditions as the ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body deems appropriate and just under the circumstances are ordered

6.3.4 Access to Records

In the interests of privacy and in order to foster an atmosphere conduciveto productive work, free from outside interference, the ccTLD DisputeResolution Body shall conduct its proceedings in private, but shall makeavailable its complete record in the event of an appeal, or at the requestof either party, upon completion of its proceedings.

6.4 Appeals

Either party to the dispute may appeal the decision of the ccTLD DisputeResolution Body to an Appeal Tribunal. The appeal will be heard by sixmembers of the ICANN Board, who shall be chosen as follows:

a) Two members chosen by the incumbent ccTLD Manager

b) Two members chosen by the Local Internet Community

c) Two members chosen by the ICANN Board itselfThe Appeals Tribunal will be presented with the entire record of thedispute, and may gather new evidence and interview new witnesses as it seesfit. The Appeals Tribunal must keep a written record of all of itsdeliberations, which shall be made available to the public after the appealsprocess is over.The Appeals Tribunal may, by a two-thirds vote, decide on one of thefollowing courses of action:

a) Uphold the findings and decisions of the ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body

b) Overturn the findings and decisions of the ccTLD Dispute ResolutionsBody, in which case a new ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body will be empanelled,which will re-examine the dispute and make its own decision according to therules, principles, and criteria set forth in this document
If the Appeals Tribunal is not able to reach a two-thirds majority in avote, the decision of the ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body will stand.

7. Redelegation Implementation

In the event that a redelegation of a ccTLD is necessary, either because theprevious ccTLD manager no longer wishes to continue, or if a redelegation isordered by the ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body after following the processesas described in this document, the IANA will announce a process forselecting a new Manager for the ccTLD.

To be qualified for consideration as the new Manager, an applicant must showthat it has at least an administrative contact in the relevant country, thatit is technically qualified, that it has the financial backing to manage thedomain as required by the Best Practices defined in the Best PracticesGuidelines, and that it has the ability, the vision, and the capacity toserve the interests of the global Internet community, and that it is as wellor better qualified to serve the interests of the local community as anyother applicant.

As the representative of the International Internet Community, IANA willselect the manager based on its best judgment of which applicant can bestserve the local and global Internet community represented by the ccTLD.Before announcing its final decision, the IANA will solicit and consider theviews of all persons or organizations wishing to comment. The IANA willalso seek out and seriously consider the views of the local Internetcommunity to the extent that such can be consistently ascertained.
 

ccTLD Drafting Task Force. For information contact avc@iatld.org