From Niall.oReilly at ucd.ie Mon May 3 18:44:05 1999 From: Niall.oReilly at ucd.ie (Niall O'Reilly) Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 17:44:05 +0100 Subject: Discussion document for review of TLD-WG workplan Message-ID: <372DD254.4DA2888D@ucd.ie> I've prepared some input for the scheduled review of the TLD-WG workplan during our session on Wednesday. Please find text and HTML versions of this attached. You will find that I suggest collapsing the workplan to a much smaller number of sections, with better focus (I hope) on today's needs. Niall O'Reilly Chair, RIPE TLD-WG -------------- next part -------------- Title: DISCUSS-RIPE-TLD-WG-Workplan-33 Date: 3 May 1999 Status: Discussion Document Next Review: RIPE-33, 5 May 1999 Discussion Document for next review of RIPE TLD-WG Workplan The TLD-WG workplan is an organic document that will be formally reviewed at each WG meeting. The workplan is listed under various sections followed by specific activities to be undertaken within each section. This edition of the workplan includes revisions agreed on 28 January 1998 at RIPE 29 in Amsterdam. A shaded background is used to highlight developments relevant to the evolution of the workplan. A different shading is used for proposals to be considered at the next review. In the plain-text version of the document, neither of these shadings is visible. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Index IANA and Stability of the DNS Root Competition TLD Coordination Project Activity DNS Infrastructure Resources Documentation and alignment of Arbitration practices Emerging Registries gTLDs Legal Cooperation With Governments Tools and Techniques Charging -------------------------------------------------------------------- IANA and Stability of the DNS Root Priority: Highest Open Actions: None The independence and stability of IANA is vital for the functioning of the DNS. In order to help preserve this the following tasks need to be done: * Help support the following aims of IANA: o protection from litigation o recognition by official governmental bodies o bottom-up authority to IANA * Discuss and find a way for nTLDs to directly or indirectly fund IANA. * Formalise relationships with IANA within a bottom-up framework. ICANN has defined the model for Supporting Organizations. These will be part of ICANN rather than separate corporations. The Domain Names Supporting Organization (DNSO) will have its inaugural constituency meetings and general assembly in Berlin later this month. CENTR has participated in the definition and formation processes both of the DNSO and of the ccTLD constituency within DNSO. Proposals * Create two new sections to supersede this one: 1. IANA and ICANN and 2. Stability of the Root. * Under (1), consider o participation through DNSO structure or just leave this to registries ... ? o stance regarding transfer of functions from IANA to ICANN o stance regarding delegation relationship between IANA/ICANN and ccTLD registries * Under (2), consider o desired responsibility for root server system o desired implementation of same -------------------------------------------------------------------- TLD Coordination Project Activity Priority: High Open Actions: None Discuss and decide upon the structure of the TLD coordination project. This project will be used to carry out actions decided upon by the WG. The following need to be discussed: * Location of project * Size of project * Scope of project * Funding of project Initial co-ordination project, RIPE-CENTR is to finish by 30 June 1999. New CENTR organization, with registries as members, will have co-ordination activity, but this seems likely not to cover all TLD-WG interests. TLD-WG activity is expected to depend mainly on volunteer effort. Proposals * Drop this section from workplan. * Organise a task force for each active section of workplan. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Documentation and alignment of practices Priority: High Open Actions: None * Collect and publish information on status and current practice of nTLD registries, with particular reference to: o publication of policy, o national consultative framework, o registration procedures, o comparative charging, o search/retrieval facilities on nTLD databases, o availability of English-language versions of documentation, o domain name statistics, o national character sets. * Develop recommendations for best practice and alignment of practices. * Publish and promote any recommendations made. RIPE CENTR project has begun collecting information. Results to date are to be seen on CENTR Web site. Proposals * Identify activities complementary to CENTR work * Set up task force(s) for specific activities * Extend list of topics to cover information of interest but no longer covered by specific section of workplan, such as: o Co-operation with Governments o Competition o Arbitration and Dispute Resolution o Legal Issues -------------------------------------------------------------------- gTLDs Priority: High Open Actions: None * Discuss development of gTLDs and how it affects nTLDs * Decide upon desired relationship with gTLDs, CORE, POC, PAB etc. * Discuss the role of NSI in domain names and its relationship to nTLDs. Make and document recommendations. Developments are being determined by ICANN and US DoC. This section is covered by proposed new IANA and ICANN section. Proposals * Drop this section from workplan -------------------------------------------------------------------- Cooperation With Governments Priority: Not prioritized Open Actions: None * Make contact with governmental and intergovernmental organizations in order to promote WG ideas to them. * Document and publish current state of the cooperation as it evolves. Registries and CENTR are expected to be active in this area. Proposals * Drop this section from workplan -------------------------------------------------------------------- Charging Priority: Not prioritized Open Actions: None * Investigate and report on whether each TLD subscribes to RIPE-152. * Carry out benchmarking of charging for participant TLDs and answer the following questions. What differences are there and why? Look at the quality of service versus charging. What is quality? This section is covered by Documentation and alignment of practices Proposals * Drop this section from workplan -------------------------------------------------------------------- Competition Priority: Not prioritized Open Actions: None * Discuss the introduction of competition to nTLDs. This section is covered by Documentation and alignment of practices Proposals * Drop this section from workplan -------------------------------------------------------------------- DNS Infrastructure Resources Priority: Not prioritized Open Actions: None * Document recommended practice for DNS infrastructure. This is to ensure functioning on a non-discriminatory basis and an avoidance of bottlenecks. Proposals * Add following activities to this section: o Track DNS technology and pilots of new features. o Avail of opportunities for co-operation with RIPE DNS-WG. * Elevate priority of this section. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Arbitration Priority: Not prioritized Open Actions: None * Study suitable arbitration procedures and if applicable suitable legal jurisdictions for this. * Take account of different legal traditions: Napoleonic vs Common Law. This section is covered by Documentation and alignment of practices Proposals * Drop this section from workplan -------------------------------------------------------------------- Emerging Registries Priority: Not prioritized Open Actions: None * Detail and provide initial support for emerging registries within the RIPE area. Proposals * Elevate priority of this section. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Legal Priority: Not prioritized Open Actions: None * Study trademark and intellectual property issues * Monitor and report and legal occurrences/changes relevant to nTLDs. This section is covered by Documentation and alignment of practices Proposals * Drop this section from workplan -------------------------------------------------------------------- Tools and Techniques Proposed new section Priority: Not prioritized Open Actions: None * Maintain catalogue of useful tools and techniques -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From niall.oreilly at ucd.ie Mon May 17 19:51:32 1999 From: niall.oreilly at ucd.ie (Niall O'Reilly) Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 18:51:32 +0100 Subject: RIPE 33: TLD-WG Summary Message-ID: <37405723.B10A9@ucd.ie> Please find attached revised TLD-WG summary, as text and as HTML. I have not yet finished with the minutes. Niall O'Reilly -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- RIPE 33: TLD-WG Summary Place: Palais Auersperg, Vienna, Austria Date: 5 May 1999 Chair: Niall O'Reilly Scribe: Maldwyn Morris Participants: 33 ccTLD Registries represented: 9 This short summary of the TLD-WG session was presented at the closing plenary session of RIPE 33. Please see the RIPE 33 TLD-WG Minutes for more detail. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Current Actions TLD-32.1 [Chair] Update Workplan Part done; kept open; follow up on list. TLD-32.2 [Chair] Determine DNS-SEC plans and need for support from DNS-WG No registries have advised Chair of plans to implement DNS-SEC. A couple have indicated that guidance from DNS-WG would be welcome. One has indicated that preparatory study is in progress. Done TLD-32.3 [Chair] Advise DB-WG of number of registries planning to use RIPE whois code Nine registries are either using or considering using the code. Done TLD-32.4 [Philippe Renaut] Present NIC-FR directory work at Vienna Done TLD-32.5 [Mike Norris] Co-ordinate review of RIPE-152 Agreed: review of RIPE-152 is not necessary at this time. Closed as OBE HARMONIC: Directory Service of NIC.FR Presentation by Philippe Renaut. HARMONIC web front-end supports query by (partial) domain name, business area or geographical location with multilingual presentation. Architecture provides for access to multiple, distributed databases. Question: are other registries prepared to make their data available in pilot project using HARMONIC interface ? See http://harmonic.nic.fr. CENTR Update Presentation by Fay Howard. RIPE-CENTR Project winding down. CENTR to incorporate in England and to locate in Oxford. Fay Howard appointed as General Manager. CENTR will be recruiting: technical and administrative staff. Technical workshop planned with RIPE-34. See http://www.centr.org. ICANN/DNSO Update Presentation by Fay Howard. Paris, BMW, Singapore. CENTR participation in consensus-building. DNSO Formation, Constituencies and General Assembly. Inaugural Meetings in Berlin later this month. See http://www.icann.org. New Actions TLD-33.1 [Chair] Provide minutes for RIPE-32 TLD-WG. TLD-33.2 [Chair] Obtain information from registries on plans for continued dependency on RIPE DB for domain objects. [ Notes added after the closing plenary session: Feedback during the plenary suggests that I have expressed this action item far too tersely for clarity. Several issues arise here: the large number of domain objects in the RIPE DB, authority for these objects and appropriateness of this location for them, quality of data in these objects, possibility of distributing data among several databases, coherency of operational contact data, single point of initial reference, control of access to the data, data privacy, and possible differences in policy among registries. These issues need to be discussed in co-ordination with DB WG, next requirements determined, and corresponding resources identified. -- Niall O'Reilly ] TLD-33.3 [Chair] Request information from registries on whether they are prepared to make their data available for pilot project using HARMONIC interface. TLD-33.4 [Chair] Place Future Direction of TLD-WG on Agenda for RIPE-34 and stimulate preparatory discussion on mailing list. TLD-33.5 [All] Contribute to workplan discussion on mailing list. ----------------------------------------------------------------