Questions they want answers to: (only placed here for easy viewing. Use their mechanisms for response as stipulated in
http://www.zadna.org.za/documents/zadna_discuss_120905.pdf)
• Q1: Does the current system of registration in defined second-level domains
adequately serve South Africa’s needs? If not, what requirements are not
being fulfilled?
• Q2: Should the .ZA domain be opened up for direct second-level registrations? If so, why? If not, why not?
• Q3: Does the single registry model make sense for the South African market?
Please provide reasons for your answer.
• Q4: What effect would a single registry model have on the rights of current
second-level domain administrators? What steps (if any) might need to be
taken to protect their interests, if the Authority implements such a model?
• Q5: Which registry operator financial model makes the most sense for the
Authority, and for the Internet sector? Are there any alternative financial
models that the Authority needs to consider?
• Q6: Does the proposed licensing model for registrars make sense for the
South African Internet sector? What other models might be appropriate to
consider?
• Q7: Should any limitations be placed on the number of registrars licensed?
• Q8: Should the registry operator (or operators) be allowed to also fulfil a
registrar function, or should a registry operator be prohibited from also
holding a registrar licence?
• Q9: Is an annual licence fee for registrars an appropriate mechanism for
registrar fees? What other models could be used for these fees?
• Q10: Are any of the licence considerations mentioned above not appropriate
for registrars? Are there any additional considerations that the Authority
should take into account?
• Q11: Should registrars be permitted to appoint resellers? What additional
conditions and requirements (if any) should be placed on registrars who
choose to appoint resellers? What conditions and requirements should be
placed on resellers?
• Q12: Should the Authority determine policy for second-level domains? If not,
then which entities would be more appropriate custodians of such policy?
• Q13: What role should current second-level domain administrators play in
determining future policy for their delegated domains?
• Q14: Are there any categories of policy (such as those discussed in section
5.4.) that should not be determined by the Authority? If so, please specify
which ones.
• Q15: What additional matters should the Authority review when determining
second-level domain policy? Who needs to be consulted before any policy
changes are made to a particular second-level domain?
• Q16: There may be many current domain name registrants who do not meet
requirements for the domains that they have registered. Should these
registrants be ‘grandfathered’ in, or should they also be required to meet any
policy requirements set by the Authority? If they should be grandfathered in,
should this be a permanent effect, or should it stay in effect only until the
domain in question is due for a renewal?
• Q17: Should the Authority designate certain sub-domains as ‘closed’ and treat those sub-domains differently from the rest of the .ZA sub-domains?
• Q18: What special rules should apply to such closed sub-domains? Are any of the special rules noted in 5.5 inappropriate exceptions to make for close subdomains?
• Q19: What criteria should be used to identify potential closed sub-domains?
Which of South Africa’s current second-level domains could be considered to
be closed sub-domains?
• Q20: There are several historic sub-domains registered directly at the secondlevel (see section 2.1). Should these domains be treated as closed subdomains?
Sign up with Google
