[kictanet] Licensing Framework for .ke

[Barrack Otieno]

Many thanks Ali for sharing the information.

My view and humble request to the Communications Authority is that
there is still need for a structured bottom up stakeholder process of
engaging stakeholders on matters of importance such as this. If
consumers are happy and educated  the numbers will increase. Consumers
will only be happy because of an efficient and effective process of
procuring domains names which can only be facilitated by registrars
since KeNIC is using the registry registrar registrant model. I think
the decision to license registrars might be interpreted in many ways
and  there is need for clarity and a deliberate step to  make sure the
process does not create a barrier for future registrars, i would be
happy to hear the position of DRAKE on this as well. It would also be
good to know whether and how the Communications Authority is engaging
the local Internet Community on this subject because it is long since
i personally saw a public invitation on this mailing list.
I look forwad to a response from Rachel or any member of the
Communications department.

Best Regards

On 11/27/14, Ali Hussein via kictanet <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> 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
> <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.
>

writing in my own capacity
-- 
Barrack O. Otieno
+254721325277
+254-20-2498789
Skype: barrack.otieno
http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/