Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.

ICANN Resolutions » 2011-01-25 - Approval of Delegation of the seven top-level domains representing India in various languages

Important note: The Board Resolutions are as reported in the Board Meeting Transcripts, Minutes & Resolutions portion of ICANN's website. Only the words contained in the Resolutions themselves represent the official acts of the Board. The explanatory text provided through this database (including the summary, implementation actions, identification of related resolutions, and additional information) is an interpretation or an explanation that has no official authority and does not represent the purpose behind the Board actions, nor does any explanations or interpretations modify or override the Resolutions themselves. Resolutions can only be modified through further act of the ICANN Board.

2011-01-25 - Approval of Delegation of the seven top-level domains representing India in various languages


Resolution of the ICANN Board
Topic: 
Delegation Of IDN ccTLD
Summary: 

Board approves the delegation of the seven top-level domains to the National Internet Exchange of India.

Category: 
ccTLDs
Meeting Date: 
Tue, 25 Jan 2011
Resolution Number: 
2011.01.25.19
Status: 
Complete
Implementation Actions: 
  • Proceed with delegation process pursuant to IANA Functions processes.
    • Responsible entity: IANA Functions Department
    • Due date: Per IANA Functions processes
    • Implementation date: Completed per IANA Functions processes
Resolution Text: 

Whereas, India is currently listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard;

Whereas, ???? ("Bharat"), encoded as "xn-h2brj9c"; ????? "Bharat"), encoded as "xnmgbbh1a71e"; ????? ("Bharat"), encoded as "xnfpcrj9c3d"; ???? ("Bharat"), encoded as "xngecrj9c"; ???? ("Bharat"), encoded as "xns9brj9c"; ??????? ("Bharat"), encoded as "xnxkc2dl3a5ee0h"; and ???? ("Bharat"), encoded as "xn-45brj9c"; are seven strings that were deemed to appropriately represent India through the IDN Fast Track process;

Whereas, ICANN has received a request for delegation of the seven strings as top-level domains to the National Internet Exchange of India;
Whereas, ICANN has reviewed the request, and has determined that the proposed delegations would be in the interests of the local and global Internet communities.

RESOLVED (2011.01.25.19), the proposed delegation of the seven top-level domains to the National Internet Exchange of India is approved.

Rationale for Resolution: 

Why the Board is addressing the issue now?

Staff presents delegation and redelegation requests for country-code domains to the Board for decision, once staff is satisfied the applicant has provided a sufficiently complete application that has a reasonable prospect of a positive Board decision. In line with ICANN's commitments to perform timely processing of requests relating to the IANA function, and the DNS root zone in particular, the ICANN Board seeks to evaluate such requests at its next scheduled Special Meeting.

What is the proposal being considered?
The proposal is to approve a request to the IANA function to change or designate the sponsoring organisation (also known as the manager or trustee) of a country-code top-level domain.

In line with established practice, the ICANN Board is involved in making the decision to proceed with such requests as one step of this multi-step process.

Which stakeholders or others were consulted?
In the course of evaluating a delegation application, ICANN staff consults with the applicant, the current operator (if applicable), and other directly connected parties. In line with ICANN's practice of keeping incomplete root zone change requests in confidence, ICANN has not performed open consultation on this matter.

What concerns or issues were raised by the community?
Any concerns or issues are raised within the public report that will be published in conjunction with this action. This report will be published on the IANA website at http://www.iana.org/ should the root zone change request has successfully completed final processing, usually 1-2 months after the Board's decision.

What significant materials did the Board review?
The Board is involved in assessing requests against a variety of public interest criteria.

This criteria includes establishing the country-code is eligible (e.g. listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard); establishing the proposed manager is supported by the local Internet community; establishing the proposed operator is operationally and technically competent; establishing the proposed manager is based locally and bound under local law; establishing the proposed manager operates fairly and equitably; establishing that in cases there is a transfer of operations that an appropriate plan is in place to preserve ongoing stability of the domain; and establishing that the action is compatible with any applicable local laws and regulations. During the staff compilation process, the applicant is asked to provide a variety of materials in support of these various aspects.

Pertinent information from these supplied materials and other staff research is provided to the Board, and published in a public report at the end of implementing an approved request.

What factors the Board found to be significant?
The Board considers factors described in the public report, in relation to the basic principles of country-code domain delegation described earlier.

Are there positive or negative community impacts?
The timely approval of country-code domain name managers that meet the various public interest criteria is positive toward ICANN's overall mission, and the local communities to which country-code top-level domains are designated to serve.

Are there fiscal impacts or ramifications on ICANN (strategic plan, operating plan, budget); the community; and/or the public?
The administration of country-code delegations in the DNS root zone is part of the IANA functions, and the delegation action should not cause any significant variance on pre-planned expenditure. It is not the role of ICANN to assess the fiscal impact of the internal operations of country-code top-level domains within a country, other than ensuring the operator is based in country and has the appropriate mechanisms to allow the local Internet community to properly oversee the domain's ongoing operation.

Are there any security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS?
For country-code top-level domain delegations, ICANN seeks to approve only such requests where reasonable concerns have been satisfactorily addressed, and the proposed new manager has demonstrated a sufficient level of operational and technical competency where such concerns should be minimal.