Subject:  RE: consensus slows things down
Date:  Mon, 14 Aug 2000 12:49:22 +0300
From:  "Brian Longwe" 
Reply-To:  afridns@afnog.org
CC:  

Admittedly in certain situations consensus can take time to come about (case
in point, AFRINIC) but in the interests of showing that due diligence has
been done, it sometimes is necessary to take the extra time at the start of
something to get the consensus, or at least be seen to have sought
consensus, and then move ahead.

One thing that does come out very clearly in ICANN's DNSO Best Practice
guidelines for ccTLD managers is that if consensus is not attainable after
having  done due diligence and the parties objecting are not objecting on
solid grounds, then ICANN can exercise authority and delegate the ccTLD to
the intending manager.

Here's a snippet of my response in a recent email discussion with a
colleague about the .KE ccTLD

---------------------------
1)
According to the latest Best practices draft the ccTLD Manager mandate comes
from the Local Internet Community, in conjunction with the overall authority
of IANA.

2)
The definition of Local Internet Commuity is loose and the BPG (Best
Practices Guidelines) says that it will vary from one country/region to
another. The BPG does, however, give a general indication of whom the LIC
(Local Internet Community) should consist of, this is: educational
community, private sector, Internet societies, individual users, government
and authorities of the state/territory.

Whatever the definition of the LIC within the country/region, it should be
documented, available for public inspection and transparent to the local
community.

3)
The re/delegation BPG says that 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

the re/delegation guidelines basically address redelegation from the
standpoint of non-performance of the incumbent ccTLD manager or complaints
about the policy/procedures of the ccTLD manager.

This is not exactly the case with the .KE namespace. Far from complaining,
we want to ensure that due diligence with regard to the necessary
consensus/mandate and overall understanding of the institution of a new
ccTLD manager is carried out.

We feel that it should be open, transparent and that once the mandate is
given, that the ccTLD will operate in a fair, efficient and reliable manner.

4)
When I discussed the issue with Randy he was all for it and in fact said
that all he needed was to know who (the specific individual) would be
responsible for the day-to-day administration and get an assurance that the
operation of the registry would be carried out reliably and effectively. He
said that as soon as we can name the person and set up the servers,
databases etc...he would hand over (and be glad to do it).

This, for us, was very encouraging. But because there is no show of due
diligence in the initial process and assignment of the APOC and TPOC, we
would like to try and make a best effort to follow the BPG and have a clear
show of support for the changes that will take place as well as an open
forum and consultation to assess the proposals that will be made for the
next APOC and TPOC.

>From: "Afternic" 
>Subject: THE URLY INDICATOR FOR JULY.28.00
>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 08:52:55 -0400
>[SNIP]
>      THE CCTLD BLUES .................................................
>
>      Disputes between national governments and the offshore
>      corporations that administer their TLDs threaten the continuity of
>      Nigeria's .ng and Malawi's .mw domains. In Nigeria's case, CNUCE,
>      the Italian firm that runs .ng, is threatening to pull the plug on
>      the country's domain by the end of August. The Pisa-based company
>      was appointed overseer of Nigeria's domain in 1995 because the
>      country's infrastructure hadn't developed sufficiently to locate
>      its administrator in Nigeria. Now that CNUCE is refusing to
>      continue its administration, the Nigerian government believes a
>      local ISP may be capable of taking over. But unless arrangements
>      can be made within the next month, the .ng domain may go offline,
>      a prospect the Nigerian government considers embarrassing.
>
>      In Malawi, the government is accusing the South African/British
>      businessman whom it hired to administer .mw of failing to fulfill
>      his end of the agreement. Moreover, government officials claim
>      that the businessman, Chris-Cope Morgan, has registered the
>      national domain to his private company and is refusing to
>      relinquish control. Malawi has appealed to IANA for help, but
>      until the matter is resolved, Malawi officials claim that .mw is
>      inaccessible (although Morgan denies this).
>
>      In either case, the potential exists for individuals, organizations,
>      and corporations alike to suffer losses of communication ability and
>      income.