ICANN’s COI and a EBERO: Recipe for disaster ?

ICANN‘s stream devise for a Continued Operations Instrument (COI) is a self-insurance intrigue that asks domain name registries to tie adult a vast volume of cash, when many cheaper and some-more essential options are available. The COI is a vast separator to entrance for all applicants, and one that hits smaller registries and those from

ICANN and a Swiss-based Universal Postal Uni...

developing countries with jagged weight. The COI requires vast amounts of money to be set aside in box of business failure. It is so punitive that it will positively inspire secretly regressive sales volume estimates by applicants, and expected to lead to aloft prices for registrants. Combined with a Emergency Backend Registry Operator (EBERO) RFI, it will sack building registries of much-needed appropriation during their vicious initial few years, and use a supports from a ensuing failures to prerogative vast obligatory registries. This is not a swindling speculation — several obligatory registries, particularly Afilias, also commend this devise as reticent and have been operative actively to make it some-more sensible: all boats boyant on a rising tide, and penetrate together too.

While registrants do need to be stable opposite registry failure, a ICANN regulation for a COI seems many improved distributed to means registry failures than to forestall them.

The mandate for a COI are given in Question 50 of a Application Guidebook. Basically, a applicant has to set aside supports (or get a minute of credit) to assure “core registry functions” for 3 years. Core registry functions are: entrance to a common registry system; Whois, DNS resolution; information escrow; and DNSSEC. That sounds reasonable adequate until we start to get into a sum — and a disproportion between what this would indeed cost and what ICANN wants set aside.

At a recent session during a ICANN Dakar assembly dedicated to a COI, nobody spoke in preference of a stream COI requirement. A registry stakeholder organisation offer that would pool a risk was shot down by egghead skill interests, who predictably were not in preference of a imperative remuneration to strengthen others (large companies will have no problem entrance adult with a COI). Others insisted that a pool was a form of insurance, and ICANN should not be in a word business. But some rough ideas toward a resolution due in this post did accept some support. The approach brazen is yield estimates of tangible expected costs, instead of a “sky is falling” unfolding that a stream devise envisages. Several groups are operative to accumulate such information to benefaction to ICANN. This post critiques a stream complement and provides an outline for a approach forward.

About Minds + Machines

Minds + Machines provides registry services for new top-level domains. With knowledge in rising over 20 top-level domains, and a many widely deployed registry height in a world, powering over 30 top-level domains, a Minds + Machines group can mangle down a routine of starting a new top-level domain into distinct and actionable steps. (Learn More)


Post to Twitter

Category(s): Domain name news
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

One Response in another blog/article

  1. […] ICANN’s COI plus the EBERO: Recipe for disaster ? (rogue.su) […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*