[Comments-ccnso-pdp3-retire-cctlds-05may20] COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED POLICY FOR THE RETIREMENT OF CCTLDS.

Fri Jul 10 21:52:32 UTC 2020

COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED POLICY FOR THE RETIREMENT OF CCTLDS. 

10th July, 2020 

I am happy at this opportunity to provide Comments on the draft Policy
developed for the Retirement of ccTLDs 

I commend the synergy in the draft developed by the working group and
the traditional role played by the ICANN Board of Directors in serving
as the final authority on the removal of a ccTLD from the Root Zone,
while this is done after the ICANN Board has reviewed systems deployed
by the IFO (staff) and affirmed that all due procedures were properly
followed, the report did not state if changes to the ICANN by-laws were
envisaged considering the role of the IFO and the ICANN Board of
Directors, nor if mechanisms within ICANN need to be restructured to
help make this process effective. 

Brands that have made massive investments in securing various domain
names across the retiring ccTLD should be provided ample time and notice
to migrate their data and contents asides switching urls in the public
domain. Entities that may have made advanced payments for their domain
names would also be desirous of holding on to their domain names until
the expiry of their domains validity, hence a 5-year notice of removal
in the retirement plan may be subject to the ccTLD, especially where a
number of ccTLD allow for domain payments of up to 10 years at a
stretch. 

Going by the proposal that the IFO must remove a retiring ccTLD from the
Root Zone no later than 10 years after having sent a Notice of Removal
to the ccTLD Manager, this condition on one hand makes it impossible for
ccTLDs to allow advance payments beyond 10 years cumulatively at every
given point. On the second hand such contracts may provide users reasons
and means to seek legal redress to stop or delay the process until their
domain validity expires. 

It may be outside the mandate of this working group to determine a price
charter for ccTLDs that does not extend beyond 10 years at any given
point in time, but ccTLD allowing payments for 10years more creates a
binding contract assuring the Registrant that they would be in business
for that duration of time and even where good reasons prevail, may
truncate the process of retiring a ccTLD until such issues are dealt
with.. 

I would like to recommend that taking into cognizance the concerns of
working group members that some Retirement Managers could game the
system leading to the numbers of active domains increasing rather than
deteriorating, a provision for mandatory system audit at least twice in
five years to be conducted by the IFO to determine if the ccTLD being
retired is truly winding down its operations or not should be a
standard. 

I am of the opinion that even If the Functional Manager of the retiring
ccTLD does not wish an extension to the Default Retirement Date stated
in the Notice of Removal, it should still be mandatory that the Manager
produce a Retirement Plan for the ccTLD which would typically include: 

 	* A copy of the Notice of Removal;
 	* The date when the ccTLD is expected to stop taking registrations,
renewals and transfers that exceed the date of removal from the Root
Zone. It is important to note that there is a reasonable expectation
that the date provided is the earliest practical date for implementing
the retirement; and
 	* Details of a Communication Plan to advise the registrants of the
Retirement of the ccTLD.

I align with the proposal that while a Retirement Plan requesting an
extension beyond five (5) years from receipt of the Notice of Removal
from the IFO is submitted, in addition to the previously listed items,
the following should accompany the plan: 

 	* The length of the extension requested (a maximum 5 additional years)
including the proposed date of the removal of the ccTLD from the Root
Zone;
 	* The reasons for requesting an extension; and
 	* An impact analysis which supports the reasons for making the
extension request.

I wish to however note that the stress tests conducted did not measure
how Registrants data and key National values resident on the retiring
ccTLDs domain/servers would affect the retirement process especially in
the light of multiple data privacy laws. 

Lawrence O. Olawale-Roberts. 

MD, MicroBoss 

Board Member, Nigeria Internet Registration Association (NIRA) and 

Member, Business Constituency, ICANN.

-- 

 		Lawrence Olawale-Roberts

 		_Managing Director/CEO_

 		p:
 		+2348056 3333 18 / 9  m: +2348070892705

 		a:
 		Suite 7, 1st floor, Right Wing, Z.M.Plaza, Plot 1469, Ahmadu Bello
Way, Area 11, Garki 2, Abuja, Nigeria.

 		w:
 		www.microboss.org [1]  e: lawrence at microboss.org

 		 [2]   [3]   [4]   [5]

 		This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected
by legal, professional or other privilege. If you are not the intended
recipient you should not store it, copy it, re-transmit it, use it or
disclose its contents, but should return it to the sender immediately
and delete your copy from your system. The views expressed are those of
the sender and his company MicroBoss. Please note that whilst we scan
all e-mails for viruses we cannot guarantee that any e-mail is
virus-free.

Links:
------
[1] http://www.microboss.org/
[2] https://www.facebook.com/Olawale.Roberts
[3] https://twitter.com/lawrenceraves
[4] https://ng.linkedin.com/in/lawrenceor
[5] https://www.instagram.com/pstlawrence/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-ccnso-pdp3-retire-cctlds-05may20/attachments/20200710/78e32d2b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Comment on the Proposed Policy for the Retirement of ccTLD. Lawrence.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 85048 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-ccnso-pdp3-retire-cctlds-05may20/attachments/20200710/78e32d2b/CommentontheProposedPolicyfortheRetirementofccTLD.Lawrence.pdf>