140 likes | 255 Views
Community and ccTLD in Japan. Joint ICANN/ITU-T ccTLD Workshop July 24, 2004 @Kuala Lumpur Hiro HOTTA Japan Registry Service (JPRS) <hotta@jprs.co.jp> http:// 日本レジストリサービス .jp/. History of JP Domain Names. 1989 -Registration in the 3 rd -level domain name space
E N D
Community and ccTLD in Japan Joint ICANN/ITU-T ccTLD Workshop July 24, 2004 @Kuala Lumpur Hiro HOTTA Japan Registry Service (JPRS) <hotta@jprs.co.jp> http://日本レジストリサービス.jp/
History of JP Domain Names • 1989 -Registration in the 3rd-level domain name space • Organizational Type JP Domain Name • co.jp, ne.jp, ac.jp, . . . • Geographic Type JP Domain Name • tokyo.jp, . . . • Restriction of “one domain name per organization” • Local presence required • Spring 2001 – General-use JP Domain Name • Registration at second level demands • - more than one domain name per organization • - simpler, lower-cost registration procedures • - short-lived domain names, such as those used in events
Redelagation of ccTLD Registry JPNIC - non-profit organization - IP addresses , domain names Demand for more flexibility in domain name registration service - finance - speed - competition JPRS - commercial company - domain names Needs of formal recognition and redelegation
Who is JPRS http://jprs.jp/en • Established • December 2000 • ccTLD registry for .JP outsourced from JPNIC • completely delegated to JPRS in April 2002 • Features • Private, for-profit company • Endorsed by Japanese Government as .JP registry • Contract with ICANN • Satisfaction of public interests • public comment, Advisory Committee & other consultation • Autonomous service regarding .JP • Registry activities overseen by Japan Network Information Center (JPNIC) and Japanese Government • Japanese Government = Ministry of Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecoms (MPHPT)
Agreement Procedure JPNIC (sponsor) IANA 1: .jp delegation 1986 Jun Murai (admin, JPNIC President) 2: letter (plan to transfer .jp admin to JPRS) Feb.2001 4. reply to ICANN’s inquiry from Murai and JPG Govern- ment 3. bilateral agreement with JPG’s endorsement letter to ICANN ICANN JPRS 5. Formal Agreement
Governance of .JP Local Internet Community Government representation consult communication ICANN JPNIC Consultation/ representation Watch Contract JPNIC, Registrar, ISP, Company, Academic, Internet Users JPRS Advisory Committee
Basic Principles of Management of .JP Since its beginning…JPNIC has played roles for • top priority on the interests of the Internet community in Japan • .JP serves for the community • reliable and stable name services • good relationship with JPG • ICANN’s Model ccTLD Sponsorship Agreement was modified to reflect these principles
ccTLD Sponsorship Agreement (.JP)-1 • Based on the Model Sponsorship Agreement… • ICANN obligations • Recognition of JPRS as the Sponsoring Organization • Maintenance of stable and secure Authoritative-Root Database • JPRS obligations • Provision of nameservice for .JP in the interest of the Internet community in Japan • Conformity to ICANN policies
ccTLD Sponsorship Agreement (.JP)-2 • Different from the Model Sponsorship Agreement… • Respecting achievements made by the Internet community in Japan, the Agreement clarifies the roles of JPNIC and JPG in the management and administration of .JP top level domain • ICANN inquires to JPG whether it is Japanese Internet community’s consensus that JPRS would be the Sponsoring Organization for .JP top level domain = > Endorsement from JPG to ICANN (2002.1.30) • Based on the November 9 Memorandum executed by and between JPRS and JPNIC, JPNIC and JPG jointly ensure the public interest of the .JP top level domain management and administration = > Consultation process of JPNIC and JPG
Typical Differences from the Model Agreement 2. Definitions 2.1 Governmental Communication => Authoritative Communication - Communication among JPRS, JPG, and JPNIC 4. The Sponsoring Organization Obligations 4.3 JPNIC, as well as JPG, plays a role on behalf of Internet Community - Overseeing the policy and taking part in Registry Data Escrow Program 4.3 JPNIC, not JPG, signs the agreement concerning Data Escrow 6. Miscellaneous 6.2 When JPG notifies ICANN about the inappropriateness of JPRS as .JP sponsorship it needs consultation with JPNIC 6.3 When JPRS is disqualified, re-redelegee will be reassigned in coordination with JPG and JPNIC
Satisfaction of Public Interests JPRS community registry data Committee member advice Advisory Committee Report if redelegation needed Board consultation Escrow Agent ICANN Agreement of delegation JPNIC overseer1 Gov. overseer2 report consultation Report on main activities Direction (in case of defect) Board Consultation meeting shareholders Shareholders Meeting registrars Partners meeting Registrants /Users Explanation of Terms and Conditions Public consultation (Web, etc.) Information (Annual Service Report,…) comment
Achievement in 3 years (from the annual service report) • First 'Partners Meeting' with registrars to discuss about the market/business • Server-based resolution service for Japanese JP domain names • Redelegation contracts with ICANN and with JPNIC • establishment of Advisory Committee • Initiatives for decreasing inappropriate DNS records • More secure communication for domain name service communication • Enhanced security in domain name service by powerful authentication of applicants • Distribution of browser plug-ins for Japanese JP domain names • LG.JP domain name space for e-government • Contribution to IDN-related protocol standardization in IETF • Unifying user contacts into one regardless of domain name classes • Flexible usage of domain names in organization M&A
Achievement in 3 years – cont’d (from the annual service report) • First orientation seminar for new registrars • Standard-compliant Japanese JP domain names registration service • Enhanced stability of DNS by geographical/network distribution • Easier registration for organization before establishment • Enabling mobile users to access web-pages with Japanese JP domain names • DNS-based Japanese JP Navi service for Japanese JP domain names through community consultation • Enhanced stability by introduction of anycast technology to Name Servers • Contribution to worldwide DNSSEC deployment efforts