Trends in ccTLD’s and models of
operation
ICANN/ITU meeting, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
July 24, 2004
Points to discuss?
• Who is CENTR
• Domain Market information and what are
ccTLDs
• Streamlined domain management.
• All issues are local – User needs and
compliance with National laws, (Privacy
rights, data protection, consumer rights
etc)
What is CENTR?
• Council of European National Top Level
Domain Registries
• Forum for TLD managers
– Primarily ccTLDs (but gTLDs ) 46 Registry
members
– Mainly European (but members from 5
continents)
– European Commission, invited Governments,
RIPE and ICANN observers.
CENTR’s Membership
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
AFGNIC Afghanistan (.af)
STA Andorra (.ad)
ISOC.AM Armenia (.am)
NIC.AC Ascension Is. (.ac), Diego Garcia (.io), St
Helena (.sh)
NIC.AT Austria (.at)
DNS Belgium Belgium (.be)
Digital Systems Bulgaria (.bg)
CIRA Canada (.ca)
CARNet Croatia (.hr)
UCY-DNS Cyprus (.cy)
CZ.NIC Czech Republic (.cz)
DENIC Germany (.de)
FICORA Finland (.fi)
AFNIC France (.fr), Mayotte (.yt), Reunion (.re), St.
Pierre & Miquelon (.pm), Wallis & Futuna Is. (.wf )
GibNet Gibraltar (.gi)
GR-Hostmaster Greece (.gr)
Island Networks Guernsey (.gg), Jersey (.je)
CHIP Hungary (.hu)
IEDR Ireland (.ie)
IPM Iran (.ir);
ISNIC Iceland (.is)
ISOC-IL Israel (.il)
IT-NIC Italy (.it)
JPRS Japan (.jp);
NIC.LY Libya (.ly)
•LITNET NOC Lithuania (.lt)
•RESTENA DNS-LU Luxembourg (.lu)
•NIC Malta Malta (.mt)
•NIC-Mexico Mexico (.mx)
•MoldData Moldova (.md)
•SIDN Netherlands (.nl)
•ISOCNZ New Zealand (.nz)
•NORID Norway (.no), Bouvet Is. (.bv), Svalbard & Jan
Mayen Is. (.sj)
•Palestinian Registry Palestine (.ps)
•NASK Poland (.pl)
•FCCNPortugal (.pt)
•RNC Romania (.ro)
•Ros-NIIROS Russia (.ru)
•RED.ES Spain (.es);
•ARNES Slovenia (.si)
•IIS Sweden (.se)
•SWITCH Switzerland (.ch), Lichtenstein (.li)
•SITA (.aero)
•Nominet UK United Kingdom (.uk)
•NeuStar United States of America (.us)
•VeriSign (.com, .net)
•Afilias (.info)
•Public Interest Registry (.org)
Benefits of diverse participation
• CENTR values participation from many different
registries
– Western and Eastern Europe, Americas, Asia, Oceania
– Different regulatory regimes, Internet community expectations,
use of domain names etc.
– Different challenges is ensuring stable DNS/Internet
• Provides diverse viewpoints
– Brings different perspectives to discussion of issues
– Helps CENTR define policies that benefit everyone
– Comes to agreed opinions based on this dialogue within
CENTR, so there is a unified opinion to the global arena
Internet users and Domain Names
All Users have choice
• gTLDs (outside jurisdiction) compete with ccTLDs
(inside jurisdiction)
• Regulation of ccTLDs in addition to normal business
practice reduces attractiveness of ccTLDs – so users
buy domains elsewhere.
• Global market, global pressure – satisfying local
culture, local needs, local environment – stimulate
success.
Domain Name market
ccTLDs make up 39% of
the market
Source: Verisign
ccTLD Registry Models
Historically Internet was used and developed by academic community
Many ccTLD registries were operated by academic institutions or
government research department.
Many academic institutions or Government research department do not
want the liability/responsibility of running a registry – create separate
body to operate Registry
Other cases internet communities invite private companies to operate on a
cost recovery basis.
Some Government research departments have handed over function to
the regulator and the regulator has handed responsibility to private
sector cost recovery companies.
Some were delegated directly to Private Sector companies.
Management Models
Streamlining Domain Management
gTLDs in competition with ccTLDs
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Chile
Poland
Germany
Malaysia
Turkey
Spain
India
0.09
0.20
0.33
0.76
2.89
7.07
39.49
• France went from 5.30 to 3.83 in one month.
Source: nic.IR
Policy decisions are local
• Users – which includes Government, determine
policy of Domain Registration.
• Technical issues handled by technical community
• Policy issues dealt with by users having regard for
the legal framework of the country where the Registry
is located.
• Internationalised Domain Names are a local issues –
policies need to be in local script and local dispute
resolution important.
Controlling ccTLD Registry does
not give power over Internet
• Industry and Government working together to satisfy
user demand will bring success to the Internet
community
• Internet is not like telephony – it has intelligence at the
edges - it has been made by design to avoid central
points of “failure” – packets (like users) circumvent
areas of restriction.
• Public / Private partnership with all control divested to
the local community makes for a solid foundation.
Government / Industry Models
Dialogue and responsibility
Some governments specifically exclude Internet Naming and
Addressing issues from Telecommunications Regulations – placing a
duty on Industry to act appropriately.
Government still controls the general framework for conducting
business and providing (non-discriminatory) services.
Market failure unlikely as industry and users have most to loose.
Policy Boards and Registry fast to respond.
Some Governments manage Internet Naming and Addressing Policy.
Industry will be unable to rescue in a timely manner, as management is
controlled by policy and process.
Summary
Industry can help Government, we say to Governments
“Internet Management is a problem you don’t want…
… you don’t need…
… we’ve solved it…
… tell us if there are issues.”
Dialogue is good and we are all here to assist.
Together we will satisfy local demand, promote local diversity,
recognise different cultures, languages and frameworks.
Future Meetings
• General Assemblies 2004
– Yerevan AM (Sept), Zürich CH (Dec)
• Technical, Administrative, Legal
workshops throughout the year.
CENTR newsletter
www.centr.org/domainwire/
Thank you
Paul M Kane
CENTR Chairman
Paul.Kane@CENTR.org