ICANN’s Tokyo meeting provides a little more clarity on the New gTLD Program.

Published on August 27th, 2010

By Tony Kirsch

New gTLDs continue to be a major topic of discussion within ICANN circles, and the regional meeting currently underway in Tokyo has revealed some interesting updates for potential applicants.

ICANN’s Chief gTLD Registry Liaison, Craig Schwartz, delivered a great presentation on the progress being made behind the scenes at ICANN and provided the attendees with an insight into a couple of key changes that are likely to be seen in the Final Applicant Guidebook. As many of our readers would be aware, we have been waiting in anticipation for the new gTLD Final Applicant Guidebook to be approved at a previously unconfirmed meeting of the ICANN Board. The date for is meeting was today announced as 23rd-24th September.

Like many others in the industry, we’ll be actively watching for the outcomes of this Board retreat where the focus will be on the new gTLD program’s remaining unresolved issues. In particular, the Board’s willingness to address the complicated Vertical Integration topic (given the inability of the VI Working Group to reach consensus) will be of interest to the many applicants likely to be affected by the outcome.

On another interesting note, one very important topic that has been flying under the radar is Registry Transition, namely the current requirement for new gTLD applicants to provide both a backup Registry Services organisation and a financial instrument sufficient to guarantee a minimum of three years of Registry operations in the event of the TLD owner being unable to operate it.

Obtaining a backup Registry Services provider is not particularly difficult. However, for many potential applicants (in particular smaller community-based applicants) the requirement to obtain a letter of credit from a financial organisation is an enormous burden and a significant additional cost.

Acknowledging this today and noting that the protection of the Registrant is paramount to this process, Schwartz said that ICANN had invested significant time and will further expand the recent concept of Emergency Backend Registry Operator (and yet another acronym, EBERO) whereby qualified applicants (i.e. Existing Registry Operators) could tender to ICANN to provide ‘temporary’ Registry Services in the event of critical failure of the Registry Operator to operate the gTLD.

This is a great initiative and should be welcomed by the community for two key reasons:

a) It has the potential to remove the requirement to name a pre-organised backup Registry Service.

b) It has the potential to reduce the level of financial guarantee to ICANN from applicants.

Other interesting points worthy of note from yesterday’s session:

• Communications Plan – This is being worked on by ICANN currently but won’t be rolled out until the Final Applicant Guidebook is approved, almost guaranteeing that the earliest date for applications will be March or April 2011

• DAGv4 Summary of Analysis – This won’t be released to the public until after the Board’s retreat, which is a surprise given that the public comment finished quite some time ago

• IDN ccTLD Fast Track – ICANN have 33 applicants, representing 22 languages, currently under review as this program continues to drive the expansion of the internet provide across the globe.

All in all, these small yet important pieces of information represent yet another positive step forward in the new gTLD process. I for one can’t wait to see what the next few months will bring.

Click here to see the presentations from the Tokyo meeting as provided by ICANN.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in ICANN, New gTLDs | No Comments

The window of opportunity for ccTLDs

Published on August 26th, 2010

By Jon Lawrence

The announcement that .co has already achieved over 450,000 new registrations since the opening up of the second-level a month ago demonstrates that there is strong demand in the global domain name marketplace for quality new domain spaces.

Though .co is the country-code Top Level Domain (ccTLD) for Colombia, the second-level registrations (ie company.co) are available on a global basis and it is being pitched as a direct competitor to the dominant .com gTLD. Google has altered its algorithm to increase the relevance of search results in the .co domain by treating .co as a gTLD and allowing .co website owners to specify the geographic regions they are targeting.  Though .CO Internet has the freedom enjoyed by all ccTLDs of not having to operate under ICANN’s policy framework, they have elected to adopt policies that very closely match that framework, including the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP).

The launch of second-level registrations under .co therefore represents, to all intents and purposes, a new gTLD launch, and appears to be a popular alternative to .com for both large corporations and small businesses, at least at this early stage.  Overstock’s purchase of o.co for US$350,000 shows a high degree of confidence in the new .co brand, and Twitter has also joined their list of high-profile anchor tenants, launching t.co as a secure URL shortening service.  Anecdotal evidence also suggests that small businesses are taking the opportunity to secure names within this new space that they had been unable to register in .com or other spaces.

The .co launch is just the latest in a long line of examples of the opportunistic repositioning of ccTLDs to compete in the global market against the ‘official’ gTLDs.  Colombia, like Montenegro (.me) and Tuvalu (.tv) and a number of others are simply leveraging their luck in the two character assignment lottery by opening up their ccTLD to the world.  Both Colombia and Montenegro have however tried to maintain the best of both worlds by reserving third-level registrations (such as .com.co and .co.me) for local entities, thereby providing trusted and dedicated domain spaces for the domestic market, while reaping the benefits of having a desirable ccTLD extension by opening up the second-level to the world.

Despite the fact that they are globally-focused and effectively gTLDs, the success of .co and .me highlights the market opportunity that currently exists for other ccTLDs that are yet to establish a clear market position.  Of course, the vast majority of countries do not have the opportunity to reposition themselves as gTLDs to chase the global market, and in most cases there will be a clear preference to focus on the needs of the local market.

A report (PDF) released by Eurid (the .eu Registry) in June highlights the power that well-established and effectively managed ccTLDs can exert in their local markets.  In Sweden, for example, the local .se ccTLD scored nearly 100% in terms of awareness and 49% for preference, compared with only 34% for .com.  Similar rankings are likely to be enjoyed by other well-established ccTLDs, and we’ve seen similar numbers in relation to the position of .au in Australia.

Many ccTLDs however face a raft of challenges that are preventing them from achieving anything like this sort of local market position.  These challenges can include the absence of local control, legacy systems, inefficient registration processes and restrictive policies, as well as a general lack of local capacity.

When ICANN’s new gTLD program finally comes to fruition (likely towards the latter part of 2011), there will be a dramatic increase in choice for prospective domain name registrants across all regions and language groups.  Those ccTLDs that are yet to position themselves as the pre-eminent domain space and default choice in their local markets therefore have a finite window of opportunity in which to do so, to ensure that they are not consigned to relative obscurity in the face of dozens of new Top Level Domains.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in ICANN, New gTLDs, ccTLDs | No Comments

A DeLorean, 88 Miles an Hour and a Fully-Charged Flux Capacitor…

Published on July 12th, 2010

By Tony Kirsch

For a brief moment last week, I thought my days spent dreaming of hover-boards, flying cars and Biff’s elusive Sports Almanac were finally over. From reports circulating online, we had finally reached “Back to the Future Day”.

Those movie buffs out there will know exactly what I’m referring to. It’s the day Doc Brown and Marty McFly pumped their DeLorean up to 88 miles per hour and flew into the future in search of, well I’m not quite sure what… But it was cool whatever it was.

BTTF

Being a guy that has long held a vision of cruising down to my local store decked out in a fluoro hat, self-drying bomber jacket and electric Nikes, it quickly came to me that Back to the Future day was, in fact, October 21, 2015. Great Scott! They had me going there for a second…

But it got me thinking. What would the Domain Name world look like if that crazy cat Doc Brown swung past in his DeLorean, with a fully-charged flux capacitor and a return ticket to October 21st 2015?

Well, you’ll never believe it…I put in a call to into an old Science camp buddy and he was able to get onto the Doc, pull him out of retirement and convince him to fire up the DeLorean, one last time, all for the greater good of the Domain Name industry.

Although I’ve kept a little secret or two to myself (like next week’s lottery numbers), below is a brief insight into what 2015 looks like for the industry:

• The new gTLD program has well and truly taken hold. Following the approval of the final version of the Applicant Guidebook at ICANN 39 in Cartegena, the 45 day registration period in early 2011 drew a massive 865 applications, including a range of generics, corporate, brand and geographic TLDs.

• 526 of those applications made it through to approval and launched. The auction process for generic TLDs created a word-wide buzz with the highlight being the 12 parties that entered into a bidding war for .web, which achieved a whopping $53 million price tag. The total revenue from the auction process was a staggering $437 million. Though much of this windfall was used to support a range of development initiatives around the globe, eyebrows were certainly raised when ICANN decided to purchase their own Airbus A380 (affectionately known as The Flying Starfish). This was deemed to be a cheaper option than sending their 430 staff to each meeting on commercial airlines, and it also solved the problem that it was becoming increasingly difficult to get to ICANN meetings as ICANN themselves had booked out all the flights. This problem came to a head at the October 2012 meeting in Vladivostok, where staff outnumbered participants.

• The kerfuffle about vertical integration is long forgotten. The Board finally lost patience with the GNSO in late 2010 and decided to allow full, unfettered integration between Registries and Registrars. Dozens of registries are creating and retailing generic TLDs with a range of innovative business models and with no detectable harm whatsoever to consumers. On the contrary, consumers and businesses now have a whole world of choice about how they construct their online identities. The massive increase in contracted parties however rendered the GNSO even more unwieldy and dysfunctional, and has led to yet another restructuring, which is taking some years to work out.

• In 2015 the definition of success for a namespace is no longer based purely on registration numbers. Registries have adopted “left of the dot” thinking to create portals that bind tribes of people together from across the globe. A focus on utility seems to have won over the more simplistic measure of volume.

• Those organisations that chose to utilise the full potential of ‘dot Brand’ TLDs and have built a strategy for implementation are reaping the benefits of leading the pack. Many industry watchers were aghast to discover that Facebook had chosen to pass up the opportunity, especially when they saw MySpace reinvent itself under the .myspace TLD, attracting more than 7 million registrants in their first 18 months of operation.

• The search market is no longer as all-powerful as it is back in 2010. The creation of ‘dot Brand’ TLDS has finally pulled users away from the clutter of search engines and back to direct navigation in its traditional and intuitive form. Marketers around the world are enjoying unheard of rates of recall and message efficiency.

• .xxx is still yet to see the light of day, despite being approved by the ICANN Board in late 2010, much to the delight of most of the adult entertainment industry. Meanwhile .sex and .porn are proving successful, even though a number of governments have blocked access to them.

• Linguistic communities across the world have followed the example of .cat and now hold a firm slice of the internet, while IDN TLDs have also been particularly successful. The Chinese language versions of .com and .org are both now well-established, with over 40 million registered names between them, happily co-existing in both Simplified and Traditional scripts. The .china IDN ccTLDs have helped to consign .cn to now almost complete irrelevancy.

• Also on the IDN front, the new IDNA2012 protocol included a number of new scripts and characters including Wing Dings and Vulcan that have caused great excitement in certain sectors of the ‘technical’ community. The inclusion of a number of additional punctuation marks as valid IDN characters also saw Yahoo! finally secure their domain name, including the exclamation mark.

• Many smaller and especially newer ccTLDs have struggled to maintain their relevance in the new Domain Name landscape having missed the window of opportunity to establish themselves before the release of the new gTLDs.

• Interestingly, the future of .tv is now in question, with the last inhabitants of the islands of Tuvalu moving to their new homes in Australia and New Zealand in late 2014 as the rising ocean engulfs the remaining dry land, and the United Nations considers what to do with a country that physically no longer exists.

But what of .com, I hear you ask? Well it’s still around and going strong, but has seen a steady decline in new registration volumes since the new gTLD program launched. A study released in late 2014 highlighted an increasing percentage of .com domains that were simply redirecting to new gTLDs.

And finally, AusRegistry International has continued to create the benchmark for ICANN meeting marketing with their wildly successful campaign involving personalised ‘TLD hover-boards’, unveiled at the March 2015 conference in Nuuk, Greenland.

So there we are, a little insight into what our world will look like when the real Back to the Future Day swings around in a little over 5 years time. While there was no reference to flying cars or talking microwaves, my time with the Doc opened my eyes to the exciting future of an industry that is driving innovation in the world’s largest media channel. I for one can’t wait to be a part of it.

Oh and according to page 286 of Gray’s Sports Almanac, 2010 is the year of Cadel Evans who finally holds on through the mountain stages to claim his first Tour de France.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Existing gTLDs, Geographic TLDs, ICANN, New gTLDs | No Comments

DNSSEC is but one link in the security chain

Published on July 12th, 2010

By Chris Wright

As the implementation of DNSSEC continues to gather momentum and with a number of ccTLDs, and the .org gTLD having deployed it into their production systems, I think it is worth pausing to take a look at the entire DNSSEC situation.

Whilst it is absolutely clear that DNSSEC is a significant step forward in terms of securing the DNS, it is but one link in the security chain and is therefore not, in itself, a comprehensive solution to fully securing the DNS system.

The first issue, which is likely to be only a short to medium term problem, is that there are currently no generally available applications, including web browsers that utilise DNSSEC. This means that even where DNSSEC has been implemented and is in active use, there is at present no straightforward means by which users can knowingly benefit from it.

It is possible to configure a DNS service to reject any records that fail DNSSEC validation, but this is an unsophisticated approach that will not differentiate to the user between DNSSEC failures and other DNS errors. Additionally there are currently no applications that (by default) will indicate the ‘success’ of any such validation to the user.

A more serious issue however is the fact that while DNSSEC provides the ability to certify that requested DNS records have come from an authoritative source and have not been tampered with in transit, it does not mean that those authoritative DNS records are themselves legitimate.

As the saying goes, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. In this case, the chain includes a number of factors, including the registrant themselves, their registrar (and hosting provider, if different) and the registry, each of which is (at least theoretically) a potential route through which malicious DNS records can be introduced.

Arguably the greatest risk sits with the registrant (which may of course be an individual or a large corporation or anything in between), where a variety of threat vectors exist, including insecure passwords, malware and social engineering. Service providers, including registrars and hosting providers should (and, of course, in the vast majority of cases, do) provide relatively high levels of security including secure logins, however with increasing automation comes increasing risk – with a fully automated system, a compromised login provides a malicious user with the freedom to make changes at will, including updating DNS records to divert traffic to phishing or other malicious sites.

Registries are also not immune from security risks and should be held to the highest security standards. In short, in order to ensure a completely secure chain of trust for the DNS, all the links in the chain on both the lookup and provisioning sides need be as secure as possible.

While this may seem to be stating the obvious, the real issue here, as I see it, is the risk that the introduction of DNSSEC may create an unwarranted sense of security. Malicious DNS records, if entered into a DNSSEC-signed zone through a compromised registrant account or via a hacking attack on a hosting provider will potentially be considered to be more ‘secure’ than legitimate, but unsigned DNS records.

Another significant concern is that there are currently no standards in existence relating to the implementation of DNSSEC, with respect to the provisioning side of the equation. Without agreed implementation standards, especially in the area of security and verification, it is likely that a variety of implementation methods will be adopted, leading to a confusing, potentially unworkable and ultimately costly environment for hosting and other service providers, that will only hamper the adoption of DNSSEC at this crucial level. This will be particularly true in the case of transferring DNSSEC-signed domains between hosting providers.

There is currently little evidence of user demand for DNSSEC, making for a challenging business case for most providers without the added complexity of having to cater for a variety of implementations. There are likely to be a small number of niche providers that will recognise an opportunity to provide DNSSEC services to their clients and are forward thinking enough to know that they are ahead of the curve by implementing now, however the success of DNSSEC requires widespread adoption. For a majority of providers, operating on tight margins, implementing DNSSEC will only start to make business sense when not supporting it starts to impact their market share.

ICANN is realistically the only organisation capable, through its gTLD Registry and Registrar contracts, of effectively mandating implementation and security standards for DNSSEC that will be adopted at all levels of the DNS supply chain, so I would encourage the development of such standards as part of ICANN’s ongoing policy development work.

AusRegistry International’s Domain Name Registry software provides full support for DNSSEC-signed zones, including real-time DNS updates, for both signed and unsigned zones.

Tags: , ,
Posted in DNSSEC | No Comments

One Billion Internet Users

Published on July 12th, 2010

By Jon Lawrence

Last week ICANN took another very significant step forward in the expansion of the internet by approving the delegation of a number of Chinese script IDN ccTLDs.

Although we have all heard statements that portray the introduction of IDN ccTLDs as being perhaps the single most important factor in the achievement of ICANN’s “One World, One Internet” vision, we should take a moment to appreciate the true significance of this latest round of IDN ccTLD approvals.

There are over one billion people in the Chinese language community, an audience that until last week required some knowledge of the Latin alphabet to navigate the internet using the Domain Name System. Even with a basic grasp of the Latin alphabet, the painful usability issue of having to switch between Chinese and Latin keyboard layouts has been a significant barrier for many end-users.

chinese add

The significance of introducing IDN ccTLDs into the Chinese language context is not just about improving accessibility, however.

We should spare a thought for the marketing managers who are tasked with communicating to an audience of over a billion Chinese consumers.

At first glance it seems like a brilliant opportunity, however it becomes a little tougher once you consider the following…

You’re running a traditional advertising campaign. You have the right brand, you’ve developed the right message and you finally have people reading and wanting to respond to your ads. All that’s required from here is the ability to drive website traffic directly from your advertisement, but you only have a Latin-based Domain Name at your disposal.

What do you think your chances of success are if your audience is unable to understand what your Latin-based domain name is?

Very little, next to none, even. In this context, the big bad (and expensive) world of search engine marketing is your only fall-back.

While I don’t profess to be fluent in Chinese, the advertisement I have included above is an example of how difficult it currently is for Chinese marketers to generate effective direct response advertising and achieve messaging efficiency.

The latest round of IDN ccTLD delegations will change all of this and change it in a big way.

Once Chinese IDN ccTLDs are introduced, more consumers will be drawn to the internet as language and usability barriers are removed. Internet penetration should accelerate and marketers will find themselves operating in a world where the doors of direct-response marketing will be flung wide open. Message recall and direct, browser-based website traffic should improve dramatically and Chinese marketers will finally be able to include a website as the primary call to action with a high level of confidence that it will succeed.

When you consider these points in the context of the sheer size of the Chinese language market, it’s easy to see the importance of this latest list of delegations to the overall success of the IDN Fast Track program.

Both China and Taiwan have had Simplified and Traditional script versions of their IDN ccTLDs approved. These are to be managed as ‘Synchronised IDN ccTLDs’, which means that both versions should resolve to the same address.

Hong Kong is spared this additional level of complexity by the simple fact that ‘Hong Kong’ is written using the same characters in both script versions. Domain names registered under .香港 will be issued both Traditional and Simplified variants, however.

The Chinese IDN ccTLDs that will soon be delegated into the root are therefore as follows:

China
.中国 (Simplified)
.中國 (Traditional)

Hong Kong
.香港

TWNIC
.台湾 (Simplified)
.台灣 (Traditional)

Recently, IANA also announced that three further IDN ccTLDs have passed the String Evaluation Phase. These are:

سوريا. (.syria – Arabic)

.新加坡 (.singapore – Chinese)
.சிங்கப்பூர் (.singapore – Tamil)

We would like to congratulate CNNIC, TWNIC and HKIRC on having their Chinese IDN ccTLD delegations approved. We would also like to congratulate SGNIC and Syria’s National Agency for Network Services on passing the String Evaluation Phase.

AusRegistry International is a strong supporter of the IDN ccTLD Fast Track Program and is a leading provider of IDN-enabled Domain Name Registry Software and Consulting Services to ccTLD Managers. We are currently supporting the launch of the Arabic script امارات. (.emarat) IDN ccTLD for the United Arab Emirates as well as the قطر. (.qatar) Arabic script IDN ccTLD for Qatar.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in ICANN, IDN ccTLD, IDNs, ccTLDs, emarat | No Comments

AusRegistry International makes ICANN Brussels yellow

Published on June 24th, 2010

by Tony Kirsch

Some ideas start off good………..and then actually surprise you and become truly brilliant.

As one of the major sponsors for the ICANN Brussels meeting currently underway, the AusRegistry International team spent a number of hours looking for fun and innovative ways to engage with the expected 1500 attendees.

It was always going to be a well attended event. A great city and in particular, a crucial time in our industry with the process for new gTLDs rapidly approaching finalisation and the ever expanding interest in Internationalised Domain Names (IDNs) among the hot topics.

We set out to make a statement at the ICANN with an idea that would generate opportunities for our Business Development team to engage with ICANN patrons, represent our commitment to innovation within the Domain Name industry and reinforce our “TLD Specialist” brand position. We also wanted to the idea to capture the personality, creativity and ownership  of the new gTLD program at a time where excitement levels are about to reach fever pitch.

Tough brief?

Not really…We have some great creative people in our team and I enjoy working with them to create awareness for AusRegistry International for all the right reasons.

Somewhere along the way, we came up with the idea of getting people to create their own “TLD t-shirt” right there at our ICANN booth. A simple idea you might say, but it’s always the simplest marketing activities that make the most impact. We chose bright yellow to ensure our t-shirts would stand out and gave conference attendees the opportunity to own their own little piece of the web on their t-shirt (no, this wasn’t an EOI process for new gTLDs)!

While we were excited about the potential of our new idea, we had no idea how successful it was going to be. 500 T-shirts, over two days, with a second order on its way. We’ve been run off our feet in the last few days making t-shirts for everyone and it’s great to be watching people walking around the meeting wearing our shirts  –  kids names, partners names (brownie points for the boys), pets, nicknames, acronyms, brands and even a few IDNs are being sported around ICANN #38 to add a little AusRegistry International colour and humour to the conference.

From all reports even ICANN Chairman, Peter Dengate-Thrush and ICANN CEO, Rod Beckstrom were seen wearing the “.peter” and  “.dad” shirts respectively which is fantastic.

So for those of you at the meeting, make sure you come and see us at our booth in the exhibition area to get your free shirt. Stocks are low so come and say hello to one of our friendly staff ASAP. While you’re there, have a chat to us about your new gTLD requirements.

For those of you participating remotely, make sure you watch the video feed for the Public Forum meeting on Thursday afternoon (Brussels time). Each person that has received a shirt will be encouraged to wear it to the forum as a sign of symbolism to the ICANN Board that the community supports new gTLDs and are ready to move forward in this next step of innovation and expansion of the internet.

We can’t wait to turn Brussels yellow!

Tags: , , ,
Posted in AusRegistry International news, ICANN | No Comments

Corporate TLDs – Why keeping mum seems to be the order of the day

Published on June 17th, 2010

By Tony Kirsch

Global brand protection powerhouse MarkMonitor recently released survey results revealing the intentions
of their corporate clients with respects to new gTLDs (see survey here).

After reading the report, it’s fair to say that I’m not surprised by the results, but continue to be frustrated by them. Where are all of these forward thinking and revolutionary online marketers and brand managers?

Are they so unaware of the opportunity that has been placed before them or are they just being very savvy?

Whilst 22% of the 97 respondents stated their intention to apply – that’s 21 for those madly reaching for a calculator, a whopping 55% (53 respondents) were ‘unsure’ as to their intentions.

Given the likelihood that ICANN will shortly be providing some long awaited clarity around application dates for the new TLD program (looking more and more likely to open in Q1 early  2011) it is disappointing that such a large number of corporate organisations are still undecided as to the direction they intend to take.

I fully appreciate that with the limited clarity on how to effectively utilise it, public support for the .brand TLD concept has been lacking. However look closely and it screams out to be heard, this is an amazing, one of a kind, opportunity for brand owners to make a huge statement of leadership, innovation and a commitment to the digital space.

Sure, I can hear the trademark attorneys sitting up in their chairs, ready to fire their arguments that the corporations of the world are the ones most severely impacted by this new TLD program and that the large brands have been victims of fraudulent activity both online and offline for years.

I hear you and the ICANN community hears you… your case has been well made over the last few years within ICANN circles discussing the policies for the new gTLD program.

However, at least in my slightly biased view, this is the one time where organisations have the opportunity to ‘redefine’ themselves and rise above the noise cluttering their online messages and build a new home where consumers can begin to easily identify and trust you again.

I agree that brand holders shouldn’t have to go and register their names in every new TLD. However, what I’ve been suggesting to a number of trademark holders around the world is that there is a different way at looking at this program that can seriously benefit your organisation.

Surely some of the millions of dollars you spend each year in protecting and promoting your brand could be used to take it to the next level (and perhaps open yourself to strategies that might actually reduce your expenditure in years to come)?

One can only assume the rationale behind the lack of announcements and/ or the apparent indecision is the result of either one or a combination of the below reasons;

•    No benefit in announcing early –Have the early adopters such as Canon and Deloitte really gained much of an          advantage? Hard to say right now but expect to see a few more in the next few months.

•    Confidentiality constraints – For many, in particular brands with acronyms, announcing early may bring                    unwarranted attention at this stage of the game.

•    Lack of Awareness – Don’t worry, you’re not the only one. ICANN’s communication program for this hasn’t even        started yet so expect to see a lot more attention on this in the second half of this year.

•    Uncertain timeframes – Now this I really understand. Brand managers have no doubt been approached by                    people discussing this new TLD program only to be told that there is no end date and no idea when there will                        actually be one. Believe me it’s as frustrating for me as it is for you.

•    Implementation Concerns – How do I do this when I’ve just spent millions on my .com address or a new                     promotion? How do I transition? All common concerns we’re hearing which encourage a ‘wait and see’ scenario.

•   Questions of how to actually use it? – Do I engage with my customers and provide them with a                                         tonykirsch.brand   domain name or just use it internally? What value can I add to my customers on top of a clear               marketing message that   will really help our organisation?

•   Buy in – Getting approvals from all of the relevant stakeholders and sharing the idea internally could be simply too       hard. Who is championing the cause at your organisation? They probably deserve a raise.

•    Cost – Many have suggested the USD 185,000 application fee to ICANN is too expensive. In reality, by the time you       put together your application, your bank guarantees and your Registry Services it’s going to be much more than               this. So if you’re worrying about the USD 185,000 and can’t see the enormous branding benefits and the possibility         of reducing your expenditure on brand protection into the next decade, then this opportunity probably isn’t really for you anyway.

All these points are entirely valid and depending on the organisation, could shape the decision on whether to apply or not in early 2011.

However, organisations can no longer afford to be complacent regarding application timeframes. ICANN have specifically stated that they will ‘continue with the current implementation plans leading to the launch of the New gTLD Program’  (see announcement here) and have made significant inroads into the Final Applicant Guidebook which is currently slated for an October or November 2010 arrival.

Examination of the most likely path forward therefore indicates that the program is due to begin accepting applications sometime in Q1 or early Q2 next year and it’s important to note that there is a limited 45 day window so those that don’t submit their application and miss out may be waiting for quite some time for another opportunity and risk being disappointed.

For many organisations, these timelines represent a significant challenge. Whilst it all sounds easy, there is significant time required to educate and motivate key stakeholders to take this innovative step as well as find the right partners to help you with the necessary application and registry services.

MarkMonitor’s conclusion from their research is the same as mine – Given the significant amount of work required for a new TLD application and the obvious necessity to obtain buy in from internal stakeholders, the time to begin these discussions is right now.

I for one can’t wait to watch this unfold.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Corporate TLDs, ICANN, New gTLDs | No Comments

ICANN may not be perfect, but it is working

Published on June 13th, 2010

by Adrian Kinderis

Though I have been critical of some of ICANN’s shortcomings, I remain a strong supporter of ICANN’s role as a private sector-led, multi-stakeholder global regulator for the Internet’s core addressing systems.

My recent blog post about my concerns with the communications processes relating to the addition of the first Arabic script IDN ccTLDs has been quoted in an ITU Staff Paper prepared for the ITU Council Working Group on the World Summit on the Information Society, to be held in Geneva tomorrow.

This document seems to suggest that my criticism was based on the fact that the delegation of Russia’s .рф IDN ccTLD did not occur at the same time as the three Arabic script IDN ccTLDs.

That was not my point at all.

The delegation of .рф involved co-ordination between IANA and Russian stakeholders to ensure that it occurred during the Russian Internet Governance Forum, held in Moscow from 12th-14th May.  My criticism of IANA was based on the fact that there was no such co-ordination displayed in relation to the delegation of the three Arabic script IDN ccTLDs, which occurred on 5th May.

I have received some strong feedback in relation to my comments, but I stand behind the substance of my complaint, which is that ICANN, and in particular, the IANA function, needs to improve its communications processes as the number of new TLDs being added to the Root will increase over the months ahead.

It would be a mistake however to interpret this criticism as in any way suggesting that I do not support ICANN as the appropriate regulatory body for the Domain Name System.

On the contrary, the idea that the International Telecommunications Union, a 145 year-old global intergovernmental bureaucracy, would take over ICANN’s role in managing the global Domain Name System, is something that fills me with dread.

I can only imagine, for example, how slowly the new gTLD program would be advancing, were it occurring within an ITU-led governance regime.  In reality, I am almost certain that it would not be advancing at all.

As I said at the start of this piece, ICANN may not be perfect, but it is working.

The IDN ccTLD Fast Track is an example of how ICANN can function well.  As Chris Disspain, Chairman of the ccNSO, said at the Russian IGF meeting last month, “the IDN Fast Track initiative is a stunning example of enhanced co-operation at work within the ICANN framework and displays just how much can be achieved – and how quickly – when governments embrace the spirit of WSIS and meaningfully engage and cooperate with the private sector in the development of internet policies and processes.”

The ITU currently has 191 member states.  According to this ITU Staff Paper, the highest percentage of member states that have attended a meeting of ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) is 31.4%, at last October’s meeting in Seoul.

I would therefore encourage the ITU to devote its energies to ensuring greater participation from a higher proportion of its member states in the GAC, rather than continuing to focus on efforts to undermine ICANN and to usurp its role in the management of the global Domain Name System.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in ICANN, IDNs, New gTLDs | No Comments

IDN ccTLDs- Our Work is Only Just Beginning

Published on May 31st, 2010

By Adrian Kinderis

Last week, I was invited by the United Arab Emirates’ Telecommunications Regulatory Agency (TRA) to join ICANN President and CEO Rod Beckstrom at the official launch of the امارات. (.emarat) Arabic script IDN ccTLD. The event was held in Abu Dhabi and was hosted by H.E. Mohamed Nasser Al Ghanim Director-General of the United Arab Emirates TRA.

AusRegistry International has enjoyed a strong partnership with the TRA for a number of years now and I am particularly proud of the role our organisation is playing in supporting the Domain Name industry in the UAE with both the .ae, and now the امارات. namespaces.

The launch was a formal recognition of the leading role that the UAE is playing in the introduction of IDN ccTLDs, the most significant transformation of the internet landscape since the creation of the Domain Name System in the 1980s.

This expansion of the internet’s addressing layer to include non-Latin scripts removes a fundamental hurdle that has excluded billions of people in language communities that do not use the Latin alphabet from experiencing the full benefits of the internet revolution.

I would like to congratulate our colleagues  at the TRA on the achievement of this historic milestone and make special note of Rod Beckstrom’s generosity in taking the time to come to the UAE to participate in this event.

It is important however, to recognise that while the introduction of IDN ccTLDs is a critical and necessary step in the expansion of internet accessibility, ICANN’s vision of ‘One World, One Internet, Everyone Connected’ currently remains a distant spot on the horizon.

Whilst I sat there amongst the celebration, I began to think about the questions and topics  that will need to be addressed as we strive to transform IDNs from an exciting opportunity, into something both viable and sustainable.

To realise the full potential of IDN ccTLDs we all have a long road ahead. The work completed thus far is really only the beginning.

There is no doubt we have a great product at our utilisation, however we must also accept that a product is only as good as the market situations that surround it.

Product Demand and Uptake

•    Is the IDN value proposition strong enough to drive change in Registrant and end user audiences?

•    Who will be the early adopters and influencers in the uptake of IDN ccTLDs?

•    Where can we expect IDNs to be positioned? Is it Value or Price?

End User Behavioural Change

•    Will Registrants and end users be open to the change presented by IDN ccTLDs?

•    To what extent will Registry operators and Registrars need to invest in marketing and education to drive behavioural change within the end user audience?

•    Will IDNs play a role in pulling end users away from search based browsing?

User Experience

•    How will developers of web browsers and other internet applications overcome the complex technical challenges that IDN ccTLDs introduce?

Internet Penetration

•    What changes can countries introducing IDN ccTLDs expect to see with respect to penetration and usage figures?

•    Will IDNs play a role in driving online business and market expansion? If so, will governments support this business opportunity?

Registrar Channels

•    To what extent will Registrars take a leading role in educating the user community?

•    What is the makeup of a typical IDN Registrar? Is it any different than an existing Registrar?

Marketing

•    What role will IDN ccTLDs play in marketing strategy and execution for leading brands?

•    How will marketers handle the transition and implementation of IDN ccTLDs?

•    What affect will IDN ccTLDs have on search marketing?

I have been, and will continue to be a strong supporter of the IDN program and am genuinely excited about the transformational effect our work and the work of others is having across the globe.

And please don’t misunderstand me, I’m not pretending to have the answers (at least not yet!) what I am trying to display here is that there is a lot of thought, hard work and dedication still required to realise the full potential of IDN ccTLDs.

Some of these answers need to come from the experts  and leaders within the industry, and others will merely become apparent as we learn and evolve with the revolutionary and exciting changes our industry is experiencing.

In the mean time, we should celebrate this significant achievement, but keep one eye carefully focused on the exciting task that lies ahead.

IMG_0079

Celebrating the launch of the .emarat IDN ccTLD (from left to right), AusRegistry International CEO Adrian Kinderis, H.E. Mohamed Nasser Al Ghanim Director-General of the United Arab Emirates TRA and ICANN President and CEO Rod Beckstrom.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in ICANN, dotAE, emarat | No Comments

By the way, Your IDN is live

Published on May 7th, 2010

By Adrian Kinderis

Just when you think ICANN has got it right, it shoots itself in the foot as only ICANN can.

Unfortunately it seems this is yet another case of one step forward and two steps back.

While we should be celebrating the fact that Internationalised Domain Names (IDNs) have finally been entered into the Root Zone, we are instead left shaking our heads at the seemingly nonexistent process lines nor communication lines between ICANN and its technical off-shoot IANA.

Before I delve into the embarrassing incompetency of IANA, let us not lose sight of the overall achievement. IDNs have been championed by many people both at a technical and administrative level – not the least of which is Tina Dam, Senior Director of IDNs at ICANN and her team.  They are an excellent example of tireless dedication and professionalism and Tina herself has devoted a large part of her ICANN career to ensure that IDNs are successfully implemented. She and all those who have worked on this massive body of work should be proud of their efforts. It is a monumental achievement and will be an impressive legacy.

The events of yesterday must have disappointed them greatly.

So what has me (and many others) ticked off? Well read on…

It is my understanding that the responsible IANA staff member failed to provide prior notification to the relevant ccTLD Managers that these names were about to be entered into the Root Zone.  While that is a very significant concern in its own right, I was alarmed to discover that the relevant ccTLD Managers were only notified many hours after the fact, long after the same IANA staff member had broadcast the news on a personal Twitter account, and even, I believe, after posting an update on the ICANN blog.

IANA staff seem to have viewed this as simply another technical update, which they were at liberty to publicise as they saw fit, without first having the courtesy to inform the most directly affected stakeholders.

This was an inappropriate manner in which to announce an event of this importance. It displays a disturbing lack of understanding and a complete disregard of the cultural and political significance of this event within the Arabic world.

I believe that IANA should take a more coordinated approach to all of its responsibilities, particularly to the addition of new TLDs to the Root Zone, to ensure that the requesting parties are given sufficient prior notice before changes are made.  This is of particular importance in a case such as this where multiple TLDs are being added simultaneously.  It is not clear, for example, whether IANA staff were even aware that this change took place during the middle of the weekend in one of the affected countries. Did they even care to check?

With a further 18 IDN ccTLDs in progress towards delegation, and the prospect of hundreds of new gTLDs to be delegated when the new gTLD program comes to fruition, it is critical that IANA’s communication and coordination procedures be carefully planned and considerate of the needs of the affected TLD Managers.

For me, the fact that certain IANA staff feel it is appropriate to put ‘I run the DNS root zone’ on their Twitter profile, says it all.  Just because you run it doesn’t mean you own it. This cozy university mentality is simply not good enough for an organisation running the most critical component of the global communications network. Your technical function, like it or not, has much broader implications.

Put simply, there is an attitude of arrogance at IANA that they will work to their timelines, and so must we. In this instance, the occasion was bigger than them. To the countries involved, countries with which we are working very closely, it was much more. This marks an historically significant achievement and advancement of the Internet in their communities.

Instead of allowing them the opportunity to celebrate their achievement they have been left to scuttle around and attempt to pull together press releases and notify the appropriate representatives of their countries. Not giving them an appropriate “heads up” and therefore making them look underprepared is unforgiveable – especially when you had previously provided an indication of “up to a month” before these delegations would occur. IANA has shown little respect for their key stakeholders and it simply isn’t good enough.

For what it is worth, congratulations to Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates from the team at AusRegistry International. You can be sure that we respect your efforts and achievements as much more than a simple entry into the Root Zone. We wish you every success.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in ICANN, IDNs, ccTLDs | No Comments

« Older Entries