On May 12th, European legislators head into their final trilogue negotiations around the NIS2 Directive. This week, the Internet Infrastructure Coalition (i2Coalition) shared guidance found below with negotiators, focused on the Directive's Article 23. i2Coalition has been detailing our concerns about Article 23 before even their public consultation in March 2021.
Like 2020, the year 2021 saw exceptional conditions, with the persistence of the health crisis. As the registry for the .FR TLD, Afnic was well placed to observe the adaptation of French society to these exceptional conditions, particularly from the viewpoint of the digital transition process. Following on from a historical record in .fr domain name creations in 2020 (793,441), the 776,514 in 2021 have confirmed the take-up of digital benefits by French users, with registrations still up 12% as compared to 2019.
Is it really 2022? Is it? Although many might view 2021 as another "lost" year due to the pandemic, filled with Zoom™ meetings, virtual conferences, working from home and restricted travel - there were a number of notable domain name stories which deserve to be highlighted. So, without further ado, here are the top 10 biggest domain name stories of 2021 - let's go!
On December 14, 2021, Dot Hip Hop, LLC (DHH) filed an Urgent Reconsideration Request following ICANN staff inaction (for its over four-month delay) of its Assignment Request for the .hiphop Registry Agreement. Not only did the ICANN Board Accountability Mechanisms Committee (BAMC) decide against considering the Reconsideration Request on an urgent basis, but on its last day of business for 2021, ICANN Org decided to retaliate against DHH for filing the Reconsideration Request in the first place ...
The .web Independent Review Process (IRP) Panel issued a Final Decision six months ago, in May 2021. Immediately thereafter, the claimant, Afilias Domains No. 3 Limited (now a shell entity known as AltaNovo Domains Limited), filed an application seeking reconsideration of the Final Decision under Rule 33 of the arbitration rules. Rule 33 allows for the clarification of an ambiguous ruling and allows the Panel the opportunity to supplement its decision if it inadvertently failed to consider a claim or defense, but specifically does not permit wholesale reconsideration of a final decision.
Are you interested in helping guide the future of the Public Interest Registry (PIR), the non-profit operator of the .ORG, .NGO and .ONG domains? Or do you know of someone who would be a good candidate? If so, the Internet Society is seeking nominations for three positions on the PIR Board of Directors. Read more for details if you are interested in being considered as a candidate or know of someone who should be considered.
Earlier this year, the Internet Engineering Task Force’s (IETF’s) Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) announced that several Proposed Standards related to the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP), including three that I co-authored, were being promoted to the prestigious designation of Internet Standard. Initially accepted as proposed standards six years ago, RFC 7480, RFC 7481, RFC 9082 and RFC 9083 now comprise the new Standard 95. RDAP allows users to access domain registration data and could one day replace its predecessor the WHOIS protocol.
As I noted on May 26, the final decision issued on May 20 in the Independent Review Process (IRP) brought by Afilias against the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) rejected Afilias’ petition to nullify the results of the public auction for .WEB, and it further rejected Afilias’ demand to have it be awarded .WEB (at a price substantially lower than the winning bid). Instead, as we urged, the IRP Panel determined that the ICANN Board should move forward with reviewing the objections made about .WEB, and to make a decision on delegation thereafter.
In April, I published an article, The Multistakeholder Moment of Truth: Will Stakeholders Hold ICANN Accountable?, alerting stakeholders that ICANN is violating its legal agreements with the U.S. Government -- namely the InterNIC licensing agreement and merged Memorandum of Understanding. At that time, I warned that it is essential for stakeholders not to remain silent in the face of this transgression, "hoping that such behavior left unchecked will end of its own accord."
Technical management of the Internet was delegated to ICANN by the U.S. government because it was believed that the private sector would be more agile and responsive to the needs of globally distributed stakeholders. However, this optimism and the faith it has produced has proven to be misplaced since ICANN's multi-stakeholder governance continues falling far short of the basic expectations set when it was created.