Comment Close



Call for
Comments Open
Call for
Vote OpenVote
Vote CloseDate of SubmissionStaff Contact and EmailStatement Number
05.08.2014Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel (RSTEP) Report on Public Interest Registry's Request to Implement Technical Bundling in .NGO and .ONGNo Statementn/an/an/an/an/an/an/an/an/a

For information about this PC, please click here 

Brief Overview

To obtain community input on the Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel (RSTEP) report regarding the Registry Operator's, Public Interest Registry, request to implement technical bundling of second level domains for .NGO and .ONG. Technical bundling is defined as a set of two different gTLDs, with identical second level labels for which certain parameters are shared.

Comment Period: 29 Jul 2014 - 5 Aug 2014 23:59 UTC
Reply Period: 6 Aug 2014 - 13 Aug 2014 23:59 UTC

Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose

On 6 June 2014, ICANN referred Public Interest Registry (PIR)'s proposed implementation[PDF, 23 KB] of technical bundling of second level domain names for .NGO and .ONG to the Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel (RSTEP) [PDF, 949 KB].

In accordance with the Registry Services Evaluation Policy (RSEP), the RSTEP had 45 calendar days to review the proposal and prepare a written report on whether the proposed Registry Service creates a reasonable risk of a meaningful adverse effect on Security or Stability in the Internet infrastructure and DNS. The RSTEP Review Team completed its report, which can be found at [PDF, 1.02 MB].

In short, the report of the RSTEP concluded the following: "Our technical evaluation of this proposed registry service with respect to the likelihood and materiality of effects on security and stability concludes that it does not create a reasonable risk of a meaningful adverse effect on security and stability. This finding is predicated on PIR demonstrating toICANN's satisfaction throughout the lifetime of the service that PIR is capable of operating the service as it is specified in the combination of registry service application and the answers to the questions asked by the review team. In order to present a complete analysis of the issues facing all of the parties affected by the PIR proposal (registrants of .ngo and .ong domain names, users of the DNS who look up names in those zones, registrars, users of the DNS as a whole, and PIR itself), the review team identified and analyzed many real but less critical potential stability issues in addition to those summarized above. These are included in Section 3 of this report."

The Review Team consisted of the following members, and were assisted in their work by the Chair of the Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel, Lyman Chapin:

  • Susan Estrada
  • Paul Hoffman (Chair)
  • Merike Kaeo
  • Jim Reid
  • Wil Tan

Under the RSEP, the RSTEP report is required to be posted for public comment on theICANN website and provided to the ICANN Board. The Board will have 30 calendar days to reach a decision. The Board may decide to 1) approve the request, 2) decline the request, or 3) defer the request for more information. In the event the Board reasonably determines that the proposed Registry Service creates a reasonable risk of a meaningful adverse effect on Stability or Security, Registry Operator will not offer the proposedRegistry Service.

Section II: Background

On 12 March 2014, Public Interest Registry submitted a RSEP request expressing its intent to offer support for mandatory technical bundling of second level domain names for .NGOand .ONG.

As described in PIR's request, a "Technical Bundle is a set of two domain names in different TLDs, 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 theRSEP), 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 required 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.

On 10 June 2014, ICANN published PIR's request for public comment. The public comment period concludes on 30 July 2014.

On 24 July 2014, ICANN received the RSTEP report, and initiated the required public comment period on the report.

Section III: Relevant Resources

Section IV: Additional Information

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