Re: [kictanet] Licensing Framework for .ke - This is a reminder to get some response from CA, KENIC, DRAKE
Rose I appreciate your response albeit 11 days later. :) As a founding member of DRAKE I'm concerned that the association of Registrars is taking this lying down. I however will take this up with you offline and see if there is a place for a contrary viewpoint on this. I firmly believe that regulation is there to make things better and provide an enabling environment for players to play. Do we know what the fees for licensing are? This half-backed implementation of a licensing framework doesn't auger well for the sector. Ali Hussein +254 770 906375 / 0713 601113 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein Sent from my iPad
On Dec 9, 2014, at 11:57 AM, Rose Maghas <[email protected]> wrote:
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
From: kictanet [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ali Hussein via kictanet Sent: 09 December 2014 10:30 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [kictanet] Licensing Framework for .ke - This is a reminder to get some response from CA, KENIC, DRAKE
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.
Regards
Ali Hussein
+254 770 906375 / 0713 601113
Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com
"I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 27, 2014, at 10:40 AM, Ali Hussein <[email protected]> wrote:
Listers
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 LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim 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> <ccTLD_Consulation_Paper_on_Licensing_Framework.pdf>
Reminds of 2001 when Kenya became the first country (in the world) to require that an Internet Exchange Point be licensed..... which set a bad precedent for the rest of the continent and especially the sub-region, which has a habit of adoringly following Kenya's footsteps.... But it's OK, once industry gets squeezed until it hurts, maybe they will wake up and start lobbying for less regulation and more facilitation, till then CA - please keep squeezing! Mblayo On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Ali Hussein via kictanet < [email protected]> wrote:
Rose
I appreciate your response albeit 11 days later. :)
As a founding member of DRAKE I'm concerned that the association of Registrars is taking this lying down. I however will take this up with you offline and see if there is a place for a contrary viewpoint on this. I firmly believe that regulation is there to make things better and provide an enabling environment for players to play.
Do we know what the fees for licensing are? This half-backed implementation of a licensing framework doesn't auger well for the sector.
*Ali Hussein*
+254 770 906375 / 0713 601113
Twitter: @AliHKassim
Skype: abu-jomo
LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim <http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim>
Blog: www.alyhussein.com
"I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 9, 2014, at 11:57 AM, Rose Maghas <[email protected]> wrote:
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
*From:* kictanet [ mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Ali Hussein via kictanet *Sent:* 09 December 2014 10:30 *To:* [email protected] *Subject:* Re: [kictanet] Licensing Framework for .ke - This is a reminder to get some response from CA, KENIC, DRAKE
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.
Regards
*Ali Hussein*
+254 770 906375 / 0713 601113
Twitter: @AliHKassim
Skype: abu-jomo
LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim
Blog: www.alyhussein.com
"I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 27, 2014, at 10:40 AM, Ali Hussein <[email protected]> wrote:
Listers
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
LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim
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>
<ccTLD_Consulation_Paper_on_Licensing_Framework.pdf>
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list [email protected] https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%40gmail.com
The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
*The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.* Abraham Lincoln <http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/abrahamlin122582.html> *Kip* *A Cruce Salus* On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe via kictanet < [email protected]> wrote:
Reminds of 2001 when Kenya became the first country (in the world) to require that an Internet Exchange Point be licensed..... which set a bad precedent for the rest of the continent and especially the sub-region, which has a habit of adoringly following Kenya's footsteps....
But it's OK, once industry gets squeezed until it hurts, maybe they will wake up and start lobbying for less regulation and more facilitation, till then CA - please keep squeezing!
Mblayo
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Ali Hussein via kictanet < [email protected]> wrote:
Rose
I appreciate your response albeit 11 days later. :)
As a founding member of DRAKE I'm concerned that the association of Registrars is taking this lying down. I however will take this up with you offline and see if there is a place for a contrary viewpoint on this. I firmly believe that regulation is there to make things better and provide an enabling environment for players to play.
Do we know what the fees for licensing are? This half-backed implementation of a licensing framework doesn't auger well for the sector.
*Ali Hussein*
+254 770 906375 / 0713 601113
Twitter: @AliHKassim
Skype: abu-jomo
LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim <http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim>
Blog: www.alyhussein.com
"I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 9, 2014, at 11:57 AM, Rose Maghas <[email protected]> wrote:
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
*From:* kictanet [ mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Ali Hussein via kictanet *Sent:* 09 December 2014 10:30 *To:* [email protected] *Subject:* Re: [kictanet] Licensing Framework for .ke - This is a reminder to get some response from CA, KENIC, DRAKE
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.
Regards
*Ali Hussein*
+254 770 906375 / 0713 601113
Twitter: @AliHKassim
Skype: abu-jomo
LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim
Blog: www.alyhussein.com
"I fear the day technology will surpass human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots". ~ Albert Einstein
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 27, 2014, at 10:40 AM, Ali Hussein <[email protected]> wrote:
Listers
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
LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim
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>
<ccTLD_Consulation_Paper_on_Licensing_Framework.pdf>
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list [email protected] https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%40gmail.com
The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list [email protected] https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kip%40kipkemoi.com
The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
participants (3)
-
Ali Hussein -
Brian Munyao Longwe -
Kipkemoi Kiptum