Comment Close



Call for
Comments Open
Call for
Vote OpenVote
Vote CloseDate of SubmissionStaff Contact and EmailStatement Number


.NGO and .ONG Registry Services Evaluation Process Request – Introduction of Technical Bundling

No Statementn/an/an/an/an/an/an/an/a
Krista Papac

For information about this PC, please click here 

Brief Overview

Public Interest Registry, the registry operator for .NGO and .ONG TLDs, submitted a request to provide a new registry service to offer support for mandatory technical bundling of second level domains for .NGO and .ONG. Such technical bundling is defined as a set of two different gTLDs, with identical second level labels. The proposal, which was submitted through the Registry Services Evaluation Process, has been referred to the Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel, and is being published to invite public comment as required by the Registry Services Evaluation Policy.

Comment Period: 10 Jun 2014 - 8 Jul 2014 23:59 UTC
Reply Period: 9 Jul 2014 - 30 Jul 2014 23:59 UTC

Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose

On 12 March 2014, Public Interest Registry (PIR) submitted a Registry Services Evaluation Process (RSEP) request expressing its intent to offer support for mandatory technical bundling of second level domain names for .NGO and .ONG.

As described in PIR’s request, a "Technical Bundle is a set of two domain names in differentTLDs, with identical second level labels for which the following parameters are shared:

  • Registrar Ownership
  • Registration and Expiry Dates
  • Registrant, Admin, Billing, and Technical Contacts
  • Name Server Association
  • Domain Status
  • Applicable grace periods (Add Grace Period, Renewal Grace Period, Auto-Renewal Grace Period, Transfer Grace Period, and Redemption Grace Period)

And for which at least the following parameters are unique:

  • DS records as required based on RFC 59."

On 21 May 2014, ICANN posted the PIR proposal for public information while it made its "preliminary determination". In the event that ICANN reasonably determines during the 15 calendar day "preliminary determination" period that the proposed Registry Service might raise significant Stability or Security issues (as defined in Sections 1.3 and 1.4 of the RSEP),ICANN will refer the proposal to the Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel (RSTEP) (as defined in Section 1.5) within five business days of making its determination, or two business days following the expiration of such 15 day period, whichever is earlier, and simultaneously invite public comment on the proposal.

On 4 June 2014, ICANN made a preliminary determination that the PIR proposal requires further consideration by the RSTEP as the new service could raise significant Security and Stability issues. On 6 June 2014 ICANN referred PIRs RSEP request to the RSTEP for further evaluation.

Under the terms of the Registry Services Evaluation Policy, the RSTEP shall have 45 calendar days from the referral (until 21 July 2014) to prepare a written report regarding the proposedRegistry Service's effect on security and stability. The report will be forwarded to the ICANNBoard and will be posted for a 15-day public comment period. The report will set forward the opinions of the RSTEP, including, but not limited to, a detailed statement of the analysis, reasons, and information upon which the panel has relied in reaching their conclusions, along with the response to any specific questions that were included in the referral fromICANN staff.

Section II: Background

PIR submitted its RSEP proposal to ICANN on 12 March 2014. This submission followed a series of discussions between PIR and ICANN, a written request for clarifications regarding the RSEP proposal, and PIR’s response to the written request for clarifications (please see Section IV, Letter to RSTEP 6 June 2014).

The proposal includes PIR’s explanation of the proposed technical bundling, the implementation of the EPP commands, the handling of DNSSEC, handling of second-level IDN variants, and WHOIS service.

Section III: Relevant Resources

Please refer to the documents below for more information:

Public Interest Registry RSEP request posted for public information on 21 May 2014:

Section IV: Additional Information

Letter to Public Interest Registry re: RSTEP referral Registry 4 June 2014:

Letter from Public Interest Registry re: RSTEP referral 5 June 2014:

Letter to RSTEP 6 June 2014:

Staff Contact



The final version to be submitted, if the draft is ratified, will be placed here by upon completion of the vote. 


The final draft version to be voted upon by the ALAC will be placed here before the vote is to begin.


The first draft submitted will be placed here before the call for comments begins.

  • No labels