Mwendwa I think it's factually incorrect to say that Kenya looks to take .ke private. I think the idea is to move it from the current status where the regulator also sits on the board and directs the way KeNIC operates to its rightful regulatory role. Of course I stand corrected on my assertions above. The .UG issue brings out again the earlier discussions. The main one being whether the new KeNIC would be Multi-Stakeholder based or it would move to a status where one stakeholder at the exclusion of others takes over. That in my humble opinion would be unacceptable and the community should resist it with all its got. Regards Ali Hussein On Wednesday, 15 October 2014, Mwendwa Kivuva via isoc <isoc@lists.my.co.ke> wrote:
Uganda seems to want to go the .KE way (public ownership), while .KE wants to go the .UG way (private ownership). Are there any lessons the two registries can learn from each other?
http://www.newvision.co.ug/news/368-blogger-the-ug-debate-is-redelegation -necessary.aspx
*There has been a lot said about the .ug ccTLD (Country Code Top Level Domain) management over the years and by the look of things we seem to be reaching the peak of this debate. *
Legislators have been drawn into the debate and judging from what we hear them say, there is definitely a lot of misinformation going on. There is cause for concern when one comes across news headlines like, “A Private Firm Owns Uganda's Internet Domain Name” and MP Taaka's query that “Is Uganda safe considering that .UG as a domain name is privately owned?”
For starters, a ccTLD is a two letter domain name extension that corresponds to a country (.ke – Kenya, .tz – Tanzania, .rw – Rwanda, .uk – United Kingdom) , territory or geographic location. So, to make things clear, .ug isn't a domain name as is being insinuated in the discussions going on in the august house.
In the early 1990s at the start of the globalised internet age, ccTLDs were issued to various countries and for those that never had the capacity to manage them, help came from ICANN through various agencies. Uganda was one of those countries that never had the capacity and Randy Bush <http://www.internethalloffame.org/inductees/randy-bush> an Internet Pioneer and founder of the Network Startup Resource Centre (NSRC) <http://www.nsrc.org> volunteered to carry out the technical management of the .ug ccTLD. Around the same period, a then youthful and ambitious Ugandan Engineer, Charles Musisi <http://ug.linkedin.com/in/charlesi3c> had picked a lot of interest in the nascent internet technologies of the times. His interest led him to set up the first email service in Uganda (FIDO-NET) and as well join a group of internet pioneers on the African continent. This interest and exposure led him to pick interest in the management of the .ug ccTLD as far back as the mid 1990s. On application, he was assigned the administrative rights and Randy Bush continued to offer the technical management support as Charles' company then, Uganda Online (now called Infinity Computers and Communications Company Ltd - i3C) started developing local capacity to do the same. Eventually, he was able to wean off Randy Bush's support and his company took over full technical and administrative management of the ccTLD. Did he buy the .ug ccTLD as is alleged? NO.
Around the same time, his colleagues in Kenya and Tanzania also undertook management of their countries' ccTLDs albeit with mixed results. Dr. Shem Ochuodho was eventually booted out of .ke ccTLD Management having failed to perform to the expectations of the community which led to the set up of KENIC <http://www.kenic.or.ke>. It is worth noting that Uganda Online was able to successfully commercialise the management of the .ug ccTLD and this is evidenced by the fact that the ccTLD has operated in a stable environment over the years without seeking any financial aid.
However, like anything, change in the internet landscape will always necessitate changes in the supporting technologies and services. Currently, there has been a significant growth in the state's interest in ICT infrastructure and services provision. This has seen the country undertake numerous interventions like the roll out of the National Fibre Backbone, promotion of the Business Process Outsourcing, e-Government implementation among others. The .ug is also being looked at as one of those services that are likely to help fill the puzzle of ICT proliferation in Uganda.
The Draft Policy Framework for the management of the .ug ccTLD has as its major objective, “to formalize management of .ug Country Code Top Level Domain Name and come up with a management framework that will ensure transparency and greater accountability towards the Internet community of Uganda and the rest of the Global Internet Community.”
The current status-quo is characterised by: • Efficient assignment of domain names • Decent Support for technical issues • Uniform domain registration costs • Stable Domain Name System (DNS) services It is clear that i3C <http://www.i3c.co.ug> is performing well on the technical front and not much can be said in that regard. However, as a private company, it has limitations on what can be achieved especially if one asks the following questions; 1. What governance systems are in place for the .ug ccTLD as a national resource currently? 2. What policies and procedures are there for the issuance, renewal, and arbitration of domain related disputes? 3. If policies are present, who designed them and was there community participation? 4. What strategies are in place to promote the usage of .ug by nationals? 5. What universal access measures are in place to ensure that various sections of society aren't alienated on the basis of gender, rural/urban divides, youth, disability among others? 6. What measures are in place to ensure that the Government of Uganda (the custodian of Uganda's resources on behalf of the people) actively participates in influencing the direction of the .ug ccTLD? 7. What measures are in place to ensure that civil society can have its input/feedback into the .ug ccTLD management process?
At the current pace, there are more gaps being created in the overall .ug management and the earlier they are addressed, the better. A quick look at the .ke ccTLD, one is able to get updated information on how many domains that are registered and active, standing at 30,156 domains with a target of 33,800 domains by the close of 2014. Not only is it hard to get accurate information on the number of domains registered and active at the .ug ccTLD but the last time I got a whiff, the estimate was 3000 domains and assuming the numbers have doubled since then, our next door neighbors are definitely rounding us up five times.
For purposes of cross comparisons, this table reveals a couple of things;
The Government of Uganda through the Ministry of ICT <http://www.ict.go.ug> has come out to crusade for the formation of the Uganda National Information Centre (ugNIC) a not for profit company comprising of representatives from government, Internet Service Providers, Civil Society/NGOs, consumers, infrastructure providers, academia and the business community. The ugNIC shall have the mandate to manage the operations of the .ug.
According to the outlined functions for the ugNIC, it is worth noting that some issues were left out. It is vital that the company created should also undertake; • Marketing of the .ug ccTLD to win national appeal • Handling domain dispute resolution according to the set out guidelines and policies
On the basis of this, it should therefore be clear that the following are mere myths: 1. That Charles Musisi <http://ug.linkedin.com/in/charlesi3c> or his company i3C <http://www.i3c.co.ug> OWN the .ug ccTLD 2. That the .ug ccTLD was assigned to a private company in bad faith. 3. That Government officials gave away the .ug ccTLD to a private entity.
As an active member of the Internet Space in Uganda, some of the reasons why I support the proposed changes in the .ug ccTLD administration are; • Increased public accountability of the .ug resource • Increased community participation in determining the future of the .ug resource • The need to separate the Technical and Administrative management of the .ug resource. While i3C may have performed well handling the Technical aspects, it has fallen short on the Administrative front. • The lack of a well incentivised reseller programme has greatly hindered the promotion of the .ug ccTLD locally. • The need for serious promotion and marketing of the .ug ccTLD • Opportunity for using Government resources to upskill the technical managers of the .ug ccTLD. • Having witnessed companies fold, what happens if i3C closed shop out of the blue? It happened to Enron <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron> (One of the largest energy companies in the world during the last century). Risking the .ug ccTLD resource to this level can have a massive impact on the nation in case such a scenario plays out.
As the Ugandan Internet community, we need to be careful to avoid the misinformation that is flying around and also ensure that we lend our support in a manner that will put national benefit at the forefront while not forgetting the patriotic work people like Engineer Charles Musisi <http://ug.linkedin.com/in/charlesi3c> have rendered this nation in the past.
Twitter: @wirejames <https://twitter.com/wirejames> Email: lunghabo [at] gmail [dot] com ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya twitter.com/lordmwesh
"There are some men who lift the age they inhabit, till all men walk on higher ground in that lifetime." - Maxwell Anderson
-- Ali Hussein Sent from Gmail Mobile