ICANN Resolutions » Delegation of eight Internationalized Domain Names representing India to the National Internet exchange of India (NIXI)
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.
Resolved (2017.06.24.08), as part of the exercise of its responsibilities under the IANA Naming Function Contract with ICANN, Public Technical Identifiers (PTI) has reviewed and evaluated the request to delegate the eight country-code top-level domains (.ಭಾರತ, .ഭാരതം, .ভাৰত, .ଭାରତ, .بارت, .भारतम्, .भारोत, .ڀارت) representing India in various languages to National Internet Exchange of India. The documentation demonstrates that the proper procedures were followed in evaluating the request.
Why the Board is addressing the issue now?
In accordance with the IANA Naming Function Contract, Public Technical Identifiers (PTI) has evaluated a request for ccTLD delegation and is presenting its report to the Board for review. This review by the Board is intended to ensure that the proper procedures were followed.
What is the proposal being considered?
The proposal is to approve a request to create eight country-code top-level domains (.ಭಾರತ, .ഭാരതം, .ভাৰত, .ଭାରତ, .بارت , .भारतम्, .भारोत, .ڀارت) representing India in various languages and assign the role of manager to the National Internet Exchange of India.
Which stakeholders or others were consulted?
In the course of evaluating this delegation application, PTI consulted with the applicant and other interested parties. As part of the application process, the applicant needs to describe consultations that were performed within the country concerning the ccTLD, and their applicability to their local Internet community.
What concerns or issues were raised by the community?
PTI is not aware of any significant issues or concerns raised by the community in relation to this request.
What significant materials did the Board review?
The Board reviewed the following evaluations:
The domains are eligible for delegation, as they are strings that have been approved by the IDN ccTLD Fast Track process, and represent a country that is listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard;
The relevant government has been consulted and does not object;
The proposed manager and its contacts agree to their responsibilities for managing these domains;
The proposal has demonstrated appropriate local Internet community consultation and support;
The proposal does not contravene any known laws or regulations;
The proposal ensures the domains are managed locally in the country, and are bound under local law;
The proposed manager has confirmed they will manage the domains in a fair and equitable manner;
The proposed manager has demonstrated appropriate operational and technical skills and plans to operate the domains;
The proposed technical configuration meets the technical conformance requirements;
No specific risks or concerns relating to Internet stability have been identified; and
Staff have provided a recommendation that this request be implemented based on the factors considered.
These evaluations are responsive to the appropriate criteria and policy frameworks, such as "Domain Name System Structure and Delegation" (RFC 1591) and "GAC Principles and Guidelines for the Delegation and Administration of Country Code Top Level Domains".
As part of the process, Delegation and Transfer reports are posted at http://www.iana.org/reports.
What factors the Board found to be significant?
The Board did not identify any specific factors of concern with this request.
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, the local communities to which country-code top-level domains are designated to serve, and responsive to obligations under the IANA Naming Function Contract.
Are there financial 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 financial impact of the internal operations of country-code top-level domains within a country.
Are there any security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS?
ICANN does not believe this request poses any notable risks to security, stability or resiliency.
This is an Organizational Administrative Function not requiring public comment.