Dear Ali and all Listers,
If you look at the The Kenya Information And Communications Act Chapter 411A, specifically section 83D it states
83D. (1) No person shall—
(a) operate an electronic certification system; or
(b) update a repository or administer a sub-domain in the Kenya country top level domain (.ke ccTLD);
except in accordance with a licence granted under this Act.
For implementation of the Act , it therefore requires that if registrars are going to administer the domains by way of being the admin contact, they do require to be licensed.
Now to go specifically to the questions you raised:
1. Shouldn't the CA/KeNIC simply have informed Registrars on the new licensing framework etc.? This is a simple matter. KeNIC has all the contacts (through DRAKE) of the Registrars. Better still, wouldn't it be even a better idea to convene a meeting where we are all taken through the new regime? Can this new framework be shared via email to all interested parties?
I cannot speak for CA or KENIC. However the “ccTLD consultation Paper on Licensing Framework” that was sent out in January by Christopher Wambua had an item on licensing of registrars under item no. 4.2 and I quote “4.2.Dot KE Subdomain Name Registrars
Dot KE ccTLD subdomain Registrars shall be required to obtain a licence from the Commission as a requirement for accreditation from the Dot KE ccTLD and
subdomains Registry to provide Dot KE ccTLD subdomain Registrar services.”
2. What is DRAKE's official position on this?
Having read through the document and participated as a stakeholder, DRAKE does support the implementation of the same.
3. As a Registrar the first thing that comes to mind is this:-
Are we not complicating and putting barriers for businesses to sell .ke domains by requiring them to be licensed by CA? Isn't it enough that the Registry is now being licensed and that the Registry vets Registrars? How are we going to grow .ke if we now have to troop to CA every year?
I stand corrected but I have NEVER required to be licensed by CA or ICANN to sell .ug, .tz, .com .net etc. Is it just me or is there something more to this than meets the eye?
I believe with this kind of framework, we can demand more from both CA and KENIC and we know that if KENIC fails we have CA to whom we can require and demand both the right policies and environment to enhance our domain registration business.
Regards,
Rose Maghas
DRAKE Chairperson
0786 220001
To CA, KENIC, DRAKE and other stakeholders
I'm really curious that something as important as this has gone unanswered by you. What are we to make of this?
Can you please give us direction.
+254 770 906375 / 0713 601113
Twitter: @AliHKassim
Skype: abu-jomo
"I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein
Sent from my iPad
Apologies for cross posting.
The above refers. Please see attached an advert appearing in the local newspapers regarding the above.
The gist of the advert is to state:-
1. The CA has now developed a licensing framework to administer the .KE name space.
2. That before any Registrar purports to sell or be accredited by KeNIC they must first be licensed by CA.
3. That if you require more information on the above please contact the CA.
Now, listers, a number of things have been playing in my mind over the last few days. And these are:-
1. Shouldn't the CA/KeNIC simply have informed Registrars on the new licensing framework etc.? This is a simple matter. KeNIC has all the contacts (through DRAKE) of the Registrars. Better still, wouldn't it be even a better idea to convene a meeting where we are all taken through the new regime? Can this new framework be shared via email to all interested parties?
2. What is DRAKE's official position on this?
3. As a Registrar the first thing that comes to mind is this:-
Are we not complicating and putting barriers for businesses to sell .ke domains by requiring them to be licensed by CA? Isn't it enough that the Registry is now being licensed and that the Registry vets Registrars? How are we going to grow .ke if we now have to troop to CA every year?
I stand corrected but I have NEVER required to be licensed by CA or ICANN to sell .ug, .tz, .com .net etc. Is it just me or is there something more to this than meets the eye?
C'mon guys, lets not complicate matters unnecessarily!
Ali Hussein
Tel: +254 770 906375/ 713 601113
Twitter: @AliHKassim
Skype: abu-jomo
Blog: www.alyhussein.com
Any information of a personal nature expressed in this email are purely mine and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the organizations that I work with.
<CA.Public Notice on .KE and Licensing of .ke Registrars.pdf>