| 
        
          A 
          working document of the Best Practices and Redelegation Working Group 
          of the ccTLD Constituency of the DNSO, part of ICANN June 
          18, 2000Version 
          2.0, for comment by ccTLD Constituency
   TABLE 
          OF CONTENTS  
          Introduction Background Note 
            on Government Involvement in the Administration of a ccTLD  
            1. 
              Definitions2. 
              Principles
 3. 
              General Guidelines
 4. 
              Complaint Procedure
  
              4.1 
                Complaint Procedure4.2 
                Types of complaints
 4.3 
                Complaints of violations of technical operations
 4.4 
                Complaints of violations of non-technical operations
 4.4.1 
                Cure of Complaint
 4.4.2 
                Failure to Cure
 5. 
              Mediation6. 
              Redelegation Proceedings
  
              6.1 
                ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body  
                6.1.1 
                  Membership and Formation of the ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body 6.2 
                Redelegation Principles 6.3 
                ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body Processes  
                6.3.1 
                  Deliberations6.3.2 
                  Criteria
 6.3.3 
                  Decisions and Voting
 6.3.4 
                  Access to Records
 6.4 
                Appeals 7. 
              Redelegation Implementation Introduction As 
          the Internet becomes a mainstream medium for education and commerce, 
          andas 
          domain names have acquired value as a means of identification on theInternet, 
          the responsibility and authority to manage top-level domains hasbecome 
          a question of hot dispute. Prodded by the United States Departmentof 
          Commerce, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), and a host 
          ofother 
          organizations and individuals, the Internet Corporation for AssignedNames 
          and Numbers (ICANN) was formed to ensure the stability of theInternet, 
          a bottom-up process for instituting change, and the prevention ofabuse 
          of monopoly powers.  During 
          the term of its exercise of powers, ICANN has concentrated itsefforts 
          on bringing reliability and openness to the generic top-level domainspace. 
          Meanwhile, controversy continues in the country-code top-leveldomain 
          space. In the spirit of the ICANN mandate for self-regulation, theCountry-Code 
          Top-Level Domain Constituency (ccTLD Constituency) of theDomain 
          Name Supporting Organization (DNSO) of ICANN declares its intentionto 
          settle controversies over the authority to manage country-code top-leveldomains 
          using the principles and procedures set forth in this document. 
           Background Starting 
          in 1985, ccTLD managers received delegations to administer ccTLDsfrom 
          IANA, or from Dr. Jon Postel as IANA's chief, based on informalcriteria. 
          Generally these managers were recognized as being an Internetauthority 
          within the territory described by the ccTLD code, either becauseof 
          their technical expertise, their renown in the global Internet community,or 
          because of their standing within Internet community in the relevantterritory. 
          In 1994, Dr. Postel and others authored RFC 1591, which laid outcriteria 
          for the delegation of a ccTLD to a manager, and on this basis, allfurther 
          ccTLDs were delegated to their managers. In either case, the twofoundation 
          stones of the delegation of any ccTLD from IANA to its managerwere 
          the stability of the technical functioning of the delegated zone, andservice 
          to the Internet community, both local and global. These dual tasksremain 
          the major responsibilities of ccTLD managers to this day and into theforeseeable 
          future.  In 
          1998, IANA was merged into the newly formed ICANN, and its tasks weresubsumed 
          under ICANN's larger remit. Due in part to the divergence betweenthe 
          principles of RFC 1591 on the one hand, and the practice of IANA on 
          theother, 
          the ICANN staff at its Berlin meeting in March of 1999 promulgatedIPC-1, 
          which set out the current practice of IANA. Since that time, RFC1591 
          and IPC-1, taken together, have been the documents from which ccTLDmanagers 
          have, at least officially, taken their instructions.  In 
          reality, however, the source of authority for ccTLD operations was Dr.Postel 
          personally. His untimely death in 1998 left a void that ICANN,occupied 
          with its main task of opening up the gTLD namespace to competition,has 
          not filled. Nor has ICANN garnered the trust from ccTLD managers thatDr. 
          Postel enjoyed. In his last years, Dr. Postel was also much occupiedwith 
          the gTLD fracas; and he did not turn his attention much to ccTLDs,which 
          were largely stable and whose problems were not as troublesome to him.As 
          a practical matter, therefore, ccTLDs have been largely self-regulatedfor 
          some time, with largely positive but not unmixed results. On the onehand, 
          most ccTLD managers have established themselves institutionally in amanner 
          that has met with widespread, if not unanimous, approval both fromthe 
          global and local Internet communities. These managers have solicitedtheir 
          government, Internet service providers, business groups, educationalinstitutions, 
          consumer advocates and others for advice, and have wonapproval 
          and consent from these and other elements of their local Internetcommunity. 
          These ccTLDs, heeding local conditions and customs, have evolvedinto 
          vital Internet institutions organically, achieving a local consensusthat 
          could not, in all probability, have been achieved by decrees from IANA,however 
          well-intentioned. These success stories point the way forward.On 
          the other hand, IANA delegated some ccTLDs to managers who have not 
          yetsuccessfully 
          achieved consensus within the local Internet community, or havenot 
          performed their task to the satisfaction of IANA. The causes vary:opposition 
          to the policies of the manager; lack of an identifiable localInternet 
          community with which the manager can successfully engage,particularly 
          in underdeveloped territories; and the destabilizing influenceof 
          the potential for huge profits, which has led some ccTLD managers topursue 
          unpopular policies, and, with equal harm, has led others to challengethe 
          legitimacy of the ccTLD manager in hopes of obtaining the delegation 
          fortheir 
          own profit.  In 
          certain cases, the mismanagement of a ccTLD may require the replacementof 
          a ccTLD manager, known as redelegation. As defined by the ccTLDConstituency's 
          Best Practice Guidelines. In these Guidelines, thesuccessful 
          performance of a ccTLD manager depends on itsapproval andacceptance 
          of the local and global Internet communities, as well as thecompetent 
          fulfillment of the technical operations of the ccTLD . Thisdocument 
          outlines the steps and procedures to be followed in the case whereredelegation 
          of the ccTLD is contemplated.    Note on Government Involvement 
          in the Administration of a ccTLD The 
          role of governments in the administration of ccTLDs has been the subjectof 
          considerable debate and rancor in various venues within ICANN andwithout, 
          as well as the source of uncertainty and doubt among ccTLDmanagers.  It 
          is important to note that the local Internet community includes, and 
          mustinclude, 
          the government of the territory associated with the country code ofthe 
          ccTLD, and a government's wishes with respect to a ccTLD must be givenvery 
          serious weight, both by the incumbent ccTLD manager and by the globalInternet 
          community. Governments, be they good, bad, or indifferent,represent 
          a territory's interest in the world arena; and governments, withdiffering 
          results, are responsible for providing the healthy economic,social, 
          and political environment, which allows for the stable operation ofany 
          enterprise.  It 
          is equally important, however, to shield a ccTLD manager from shiftingpolitical 
          winds. The stability of the ccTLD, which is the primaryresponsibility 
          of the ccTLD manager, must be protected from whimsicalpersonal 
          interference by political figures; from distraction by moneymakingschemes 
          backed by political influence, and from disenfranchisement andeconomic 
          loss due to changes in government. The will of the government mustbe 
          expressed in a way that makes it clear that it is the will of thegovernment, 
          and not of one or more individuals within a government.The 
          smooth functioning of a ccTLD is part of the smooth functioning of theInternet 
          as a whole. The stability of the ccTLD is part of the stability ofthe 
          Internet as a whole. Therefore, the actions of a government, withrespect 
          to a ccTLD, cannot be viewed as uniquely local actions; nor can agovernment 
          be viewed as the sole interest that the ccTLD serves. A ccTLDbelongs 
          to the local Internet community, of which the government is a part;but 
          also to the global Internet community.  The 
          government of a territory is, indirectly, given substantial power over 
          accTLD 
          in that the administrative contact for the ccTLD is required by RFC1591 
          and IPC-1 to reside in that territory, and is thus subject to its laws. 
              
          1. 
            Definitions ccTLD 
            - A country code top level domain in the top level of the globaldomain 
            name system, assigned according to the two-letter codes in the ISO3166-1 
            standard codes for the representation of names of countries orterritories. 
           ccTLD 
            Registry - The entity which records names as domain names in aregister 
            of domain names for the country-code top level domain name,according 
            to policies and rules established by the ccTLD manager inconsultation 
            with the local and global Internet communities, and conformingto the 
            Best Practice Guidelines established by the ccTLD community.ccTLD 
            Manager - A company, organisation or individual managing a ccTLDRegistry. 
           Registrant 
            - A company, organisation or individual for whom a name has beenregistered 
            as a domain name in the ccTLD domain name register.ICANN - Internet 
            Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers.IANA - Internet Assigned 
            Numbers Authority (incorporated into ICANN in1999). 
           Local 
            Internet Community - The Internet industry and users (e.g. theeducational 
            community, the private sector, Internet societies, individualusers, 
            et al.), and the government and authorities of the state or territorywith 
            which the ccTLD is associated. ccTLD 
          Dispute Resolution Body - a Body, as further defined in this document,which 
          will function as a panel to adjudicate disputes concerning themanagement 
          of a ccTLD or the right to manage a ccTLD.    
          2. 
            Principles 
          
            ccTLD 
              managers operate within a self-regulating environment, within theICANN 
              framework
 
ccTLDs 
              are managed for the benefit of the local and global Internet communities, 
              and are responsible to those communities
 
ccTLD 
              managers require certainty and stability in ccTLD delegations
 
Any 
              party who is dissatisfied with the performance of a ccTLD manager 
              has the 
              right to a venue where its complaint will be heard and considered.
 
Redelegation 
              of a ccTLD, or replacement of a ccTLD manager, is appropriate in 
              the case of death or dissolution of the ccTLD manager; voluntary 
              relinquishment 
              of duties by the incumbent ccTLD manager; or because of non-performance 
              of ccTLD managerial duties, and only after a fair and open process 
              as described in this document
 
No 
              ccTLD manager shall be replaced, and no redelegation of a ccTLD 
              shall occur, 
              without a showing of non-performance, and without an opportunity 
              by the 
              ccTLD manager to rectify any deficiencies
 
The 
              role of IANA with respect to ccTLDs is to assure the technical stability 
              of all ccTLD operations, and to facilitate and implement codes of 
              conduct 
              as established by the ccTLD constituency
 
The 
              mandate for a redelegation comes jointly from the local Internet 
              community 
              and the IANA, as these two bodies - per the Best Practices Guidelines 
              established by the ccTLD Constituency - are similarly the source 
              of 
              the mandate under which a ccTLD manager operates a ccTLD.
 
All 
              parties involved in disputes need to know that their point of view 
              will 
              be fairly heard 
          
          3. 
            General GuidelinesAny 
          consideration of redelegation of a ccTLD, or replacement of a ccTLDmanager, 
          must stem from a complaint about poor performance by a manager.Therefore, 
          any redelegation action should occur only after these steps arefollowed:  
            a. 
              Complaint b. 
              Opportunity for the ccTLD Manager to resolve or cure the cause of 
              the complaint, 
              or to give notice that it considers the complaint to be of no merit c. 
              Mediation d. 
              Formal redelegation proceedings    
          4. 
            Complaint Procedure  
            4.1 
              Complaint ProcedureAny 
            party having dealings with a ccTLD may lodge a complaint with the 
            IANAconcerning 
            the behavior of the ccTLD Manager. 4.2 
              Types of complaintsAny 
            complaint concerning the performance of a ccTLD manager shall fall 
            intoone 
            of two categories:  
              4.2.1 
                Complaints concerning the technical operation of the ccTLD 4.2.2 
                Complaints concerning the non-technical administration of the 
                ccTLD, including 
                complaints about the policy or procedures of a ccTLD 4.3 
              Complaints of violations of technical operationsIn 
            the case where a complaint is lodged concerning the technical operationof 
            a ccTLD, and the IANA considers that the alleged violation threatens 
            thestability 
            of the DNS, the IANA may move to enforce its technical standardsimmediately, 
            including the temporary suspension of operations of the ccTLD.Such 
            suspension may only be undertaken as a temporary measure, and may 
            becontinued 
            only as long as the IANA determines that lifting the suspensionwould 
            constitute a threat to the smooth operation of the DNS. 4.4 
              Complaints of violations of non-technical operationsIf 
            the IANA considers that the complaint of an alleged non-technicalviolation 
            is serious, and that it violates the Best Practices Guidelinesestablished 
            by the ccTLD Constituency, it shall inform the ccTLDConstituency 
            of the complaint in writing, and it may contact the ccTLDManager 
            and ask for an explanation. The ccTLD Constituency may advise IANAin 
            the matter. A showing that the ccTLD management has not and will notoperate 
            the domain according to the desires of the local Internet community,if 
            such desires are consistent with the Best Practice Guidelines, shall 
            besufficient 
            to establish that the complaint is serious.  
              4.4.1 
                Cure of Complaint. If the IANA, having asked a ccTLD manager for 
                anexplanation 
                of an apparent violation, finds the explanation inadequate, orif 
                the IANA receives a complaint of a serious violation of the BestPractices 
                and Guidelines that requires immediate action, IANA may instructthe 
                ccTLD Manager to fix the problem. IANA shall issue such instructions 
                inwriting, 
                and shall suggest a course of action to rectify the violation.  4.4.2 
                Failure to Cure. If the ccTLD Manager refuses to cure a violation, 
                ordoes 
                not cure a violation, the IANA shall issue written notice that 
                theManager 
                is in violation of the Best Practices Guidelines. Such writtennotice 
                shall be sufficient cause, at IANA's discretion, in consultation 
                withthe 
                ccTLD Constituency, to initiate Mediation, as described below. 
                NeitherIANA 
                or ICANN shall take any action to redelegate the domain or replace 
                theccTLD 
                Manager without first undertaking Mediation and Redelegationproceedings. 
               5. 
            Mediation If, 
            in the face of serious and persistent violations, a ccTLD continues 
            toviolate 
            the Best Practices Guidelines, the Local Internet Community maychallenge 
            the delegation of the ccTLD to the ccTLD manager and may requestthat 
            the manager be replaced.  In 
            such an event, IANA shall attempt to mediate the dispute. It shall 
            bethe 
            policy of IANA to insist that significant parties to a dispute over 
            themanagement 
            of a ccTLD engage in good faith attempts to consult with eachother 
            in constructive ways to resolve disputes relating to the management 
            ofthe 
            ccTLD, including independent third-party mediation where appropriate.The 
            goal of mediation shall be to have the parties better understand thelegitimate 
            desires, intentions, and activities of the other party, and tohave 
            the parties agree to adjust their policies and practices wherenecessary 
            to accommodate reasonable interests of the other parties.It 
            shall be the goal of mediation to educate all the parties as to the 
            bestpractices 
            in the Internet Community and to the methods of conforming suchbest 
            practices to the circumstances of the particular ccTLD. The primarygoal 
            of the mediation shall be to bring the operation of a ccTLD intocompliance 
            with the Best Practices Guidelines, which include operating thedomain 
            according to the wishes of the local Internet community. compliancewith 
            the desires of the local Internet community, where such wishes areconsistent 
            with the Best Practice Guidelines.  IANA 
            shall keep written records of any mediation, for use, if necessary, 
            inredelegation 
            proceedings.  Upon 
            a showing that such good-faith efforts have been undertaken, butwithout 
            satisfactory resolution of the dispute, IANA will invoke the disputeresolution 
            mechanism described below. The ultimate sanction of redelegationshall 
            only be considered after exhausting alternative avenues of bringingthe 
            ccTLD into compliance with the Best Practices Guidelines. 
           6. 
            Redelegation ProceedingsIn 
          the event that good-faith attempts at mediation fail,IANA will invokeformal 
          redelegation proceedings.  
            6.1 
              ccTLD Dispute Resolution BodyRedelegation 
            proceedings shall be conducted by the ccTLD Dispute ResolutionBody, 
            which shall adopt procedures that guarantee an open and fair processfor 
            all parties, including open hearings with the right to have meaningfulreview 
            in advance of all evidence to be presented in the proceedings, topresent 
            evidence in writing and through witnesses, and to confront witnessespresenting 
            evidence adverse to a party.  
              6.1.1 
                Membership and Formation of the ccTLD Dispute Resolution BodyThe 
              ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body will consist of a panel of seven members.Members 
              shall be appointed as follows:  
                a) 
                  One member appointed by the Local Internet Community b) 
                  One member appointed by the government of the territory associated 
                  with the 
                  country code of the ccTLD c) 
                  One member appointed by the ccTLD Constituency d) 
                  One member appointed by the ccTLD Manager e) 
                  Two members appointed by IANAf) 
                One member, chosen by IANA, who shall be a "trusted third party." 
                IANAshall 
                attempt to find a person who is a renowned figure with experience 
                indispute 
                resolution, who has no involvement with the either the territory 
                inquestion, 
                or the ccTLD manager. 6.2 
              Redelegation PrinciplesThe 
            principles below, framed as questions, must be taken into account 
            beforethe 
            ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body releases any decision:  
              a) 
                Is the ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body's decision likely to cause 
                or sustain 
                a fundamental injustice? b) 
                Will the decision disadvantage the local or global Internet community 
                to a 
                greater degree than any perceived advantage that might accrue 
                from its implementation? c) 
                Will the decision breach the law in the country in question? d) 
                Will the decision threaten the stability of the DNS? 6.3 
              ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body Processes  
              6.3.1 
                DeliberationsThe 
              ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body shall meet to deliberate, either in 
              personor 
              by other means that are acceptable to panel members and to thedisputants. 
              In the course of its deliberations, the ccTLD DisputeResolution 
              Body shall:  
                a) 
                  Request from the IANA a written record of all previous proceedings 
                  concerning 
                  the debate, which IANA shall provide b) 
                  Keep a written record of all of its proceedings c) 
                  Introduce into the record all communications with the disputants 
                  and with other 
                  parties with whom it communicates in connection with its fact-finding 
                  activities 
                  and its deliberations, and note in the record any communications, 
                  solicited 
                  or unsolicited, that it receives from third parties d) 
                  Attempt to gather all relevant information, as an affirmative 
                  duty e) 
                  Accord to each side in the dispute an opportunity to present 
                  evidence and witnesses 
                  in support of its case 6.3.2 
                CriteriaThe 
              ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body must consider the following criteria,among 
              any others it deems suitable:  
                a) 
                  The manager's adherence to the Best Practice Guidelines, or 
                  other Internet 
                  standards b) 
                  The manager's track record with the local Internet (user) community c) 
                  The legal basis for the original delegation to the current manager d) 
                  Whether the manager is abusing a dominant position in the marketplace e) 
                  Whether an acceptable alternative to the current manager exists. 
                  An 
                  alternative candidate should:  
                  1) 
                    Have a structure or process to guarantee that a future situation 
                    of monopolistic 
                    abuse will not come about 2) 
                    Have access to the technology to operate a ccTLD in a manner 
                    that assures the 
                    stable operation of the DNS 3) 
                    Be financially viable 4) 
                    Be acceptable to the local and global Internet communities 6.3.3 
                Decisions and VotingIn 
              the interests of continuing stability, the ccTLD Dispute Resolution 
              Bodyshall 
              strive to reach a unanimous decision following its deliberations. 
              Ifa 
              unanimous decision is not possible, however, any decision shall 
              require atleast 
              an affirmative majority of two-thirds of all members, includingnon-voting 
              members. The 
                ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body may reach one of the following decisions:  
                a) 
                  The current ccTLD manager retains the delegation b) 
                  The ccTLD is redelegated to the alternative proposed by the 
                  complainant c) 
                  Either of the above with modifications to the approach of the 
                  complainant's 
                  alternative or the existing manager, d) 
                  Such restrictions and conditions as the ccTLD Dispute Resolution 
                  Body deems 
                  appropriate and just under the circumstances are ordered 6.3.4 
                Access to RecordsIn 
              the interests of privacy and in order to foster an atmosphere conduciveto 
              productive work, free from outside interference, the ccTLD DisputeResolution 
              Body shall conduct its proceedings in private, but shall makeavailable 
              its complete record in the event of an appeal, or at the requestof 
              either party, upon completion of its proceedings. 6.4 
              AppealsEither 
            party to the dispute may appeal the decision of the ccTLD DisputeResolution 
            Body to an Appeal Tribunal. The appeal will be heard by sixmembers 
            of the ICANN Board, who shall be chosen as follows:  
              a) 
                Two members chosen by the incumbent ccTLD Manager b) 
                Two members chosen by the Local Internet Communityc) 
              Two members chosen by the ICANN Board itselfThe 
              Appeals Tribunal will be presented with the entire record of thedispute, 
              and may gather new evidence and interview new witnesses as it seesfit. 
              The Appeals Tribunal must keep a written record of all of itsdeliberations, 
              which shall be made available to the public after the appealsprocess 
              is over.The 
              Appeals Tribunal may, by a two-thirds vote, decide on one of thefollowing 
              courses of action:  
                If 
              the Appeals Tribunal is not able to reach a two-thirds majority 
              in avote, 
              the decision of the ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body will stand.a) 
                  Uphold the findings and decisions of the ccTLD Dispute Resolution 
                  Bodyb) 
                Overturn the findings and decisions of the ccTLD Dispute ResolutionsBody, 
                in which case a new ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body will be empanelled,which 
                will re-examine the dispute and make its own decision according 
                to therules, 
                principles, and criteria set forth in this document 7. 
            Redelegation Implementation In 
            the event that a redelegation of a ccTLD is necessary, either because 
            theprevious 
            ccTLD manager no longer wishes to continue, or if a redelegation isordered 
            by the ccTLD Dispute Resolution Body after following the processesas 
            described in this document, the IANA will announce a process forselecting 
            a new Manager for the ccTLD.  To 
            be qualified for consideration as the new Manager, an applicant must 
            showthat 
            it has at least an administrative contact in the relevant country, 
            thatit 
            is technically qualified, that it has the financial backing to manage 
            thedomain 
            as required by the Best Practices defined in the Best PracticesGuidelines, 
            and that it has the ability, the vision, and the capacity toserve 
            the interests of the global Internet community, and that it is as 
            wellor 
            better qualified to serve the interests of the local community as 
            anyother 
            applicant. As 
          the representative of the International Internet Community, IANA willselect 
          the manager based on its best judgment of which applicant can bestserve 
          the local and global Internet community represented by the ccTLD.Before 
          announcing its final decision, the IANA will solicit and consider theviews 
          of all persons or organizations wishing to comment. The IANA willalso 
          seek out and seriously consider the views of the local Internetcommunity 
          to the extent that such can be consistently ascertained. |