Summary Analysis of RSEP Requests
(Please see here for updated summary analysis. This page was last updated 16 August 2016.)
The Registry Services Evaluation Policy (RSEP) was developed through ICANN's consensus policy development process, and adopted by the ICANN Board on 8 November 2005. Each gTLD Registry Agreement identifies the RSEP process as the mechanism to add, modify or remove a registry service. 'Registry service' is defined in the Registry Agreement and in Section 1.1 of the RSEP at http://www.icann.org/registries/rsep/rsep.html. ICANN evaluates the proposed service for its potential effect on Security, Stability or competition as they are defined under the RSEP.
ICANN began receiving RSEP requests in 2006. Information regarding all requests for registry services that have been published by ICANN can be found at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rsep-2014-02-19-en
Overview of RSEP Process Steps and Statuses
Below is a high-level illustration of the RSEP process steps, associated statuses and service level targets. At any time, a RSEP request can be withdrawn or cancelled. In order to fulfil ICANN confidentiality obligations, the scope of this analysis excludes those requests that have been withdrawn before they reached ICANN Review (step 3) at which time the request is published on the page referenced above.
At A Glance
- In 2006, 4 RSEP requests were published.
- In 2015, 93 RSEP requests were published.
- From inception until 17 March 2016, the total number of RSEP requests published by ICANN is 238.
- There was major growth in the number of RSEP requests in calendar years 2014 and 2015, and is mainly driven by 2 types of requests: IDN services and release of reserved names.
RSEP request types in 2014 and 2015
Below is a list of published RSEP requests, by service type, received from 2006 through 17 March 2016. Please refer to Appendix 1 for a detailed breakdown of requests.
| Request Types | Abuse Prevention | DNS | Domain Registration Programs | Internationalized Domain Names | Registration Data Directory Services (RDDS) | Registration Lifecycle | Reserved Names | Others | Total Requests |
| 2006 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| 2007 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 5 |
| 2008 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 11 |
| 2009 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 11 |
| 2010 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 13 |
| 2011 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 8 |
| 2012 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| 2013 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| 2014 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 21 | 1 | 0 | 42 | 1 | 69 |
| 2015 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 47 | 2 | 4 | 35 | 1 | 93 |
| 2016 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 14 |
| Total | 12 | 15 | 6 | 78 | 7 | 18 | 100 | 2 | 238 |
Through 2013, the average number of published RSEP requests per year was 7. RSEP requests in 2014 and 2015 increased significantly due to the following factors;
- The exponential increase in the number of gTLDs
- Addition of certain IDN languages per gTLD
- Requested release of reserved country and territory names
- Requested release of certain reserved two-character ASCII labels
Effective 1 December 2014, ICANN launched an authorization process for the release of two-character ASCII labels for all new gTLD registry operators. Therefore, the RSEP is no longer used for requests to release two-character ASCII labels from reservation.
The table below shows a summary of all the requests' statuses as of 17 March 2016.
| RSEP Requests Status | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 |
| Approved | 2 | 4 | 5 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 25 | 50 | 6 |
| Approved, Refer to ICANN Authorization via Authorization Process | 34 | 1 | |||||||||
| Approved, Pending Contract Amendment | 1 | 3 | 6 | ||||||||
| Approved, Public Comment** | 1 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 1 | |||||
| ICANN Review | 1 | ||||||||||
| Public Comment | 1 | 1 | 7 | 33 | 2 | ||||||
| Referred to RSTEP*, Public Comment, Approved by the Board | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| Referred to RSTEP*, Public Comment, Not Approved by the Board | 1 | ||||||||||
| Public Comment, Withdrawn | 1 | ||||||||||
| Withdrawn | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | |||||||
| Total Requests | 4 | 5 | 11 | 11 | 13 | 8 | 4 | 6 | 69 | 93 | 14 |
Notes:
* RSTEP refers to Registry Services Technical Evaluation Panel (https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/technical-evaluation-panel-2012-02-25-en)
** Status on RSEP is approved, and proposed amendment had been posted for Public Comment (https://www.icann.org/public-comments)
RSEP Comments
ICANN offers an open comment forum ("the RSEP forum") for the RSEP process or proposals for new registry services published at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/rsep-2014-02-19-en. Comments submitted to the RSEP forum may be viewed at http://forum.icann.org/lists/registryservice.
As of 30 June 2016, there have been no comments regarding the RSEP process submitted to the RSEP forum, though there have been administrative inquiries.
The table below summarizes comments relating to specific RSEP requests submitted to the RSEP forum between 2007 to 2015. 36 unique comments were submitted to the RSEP forum regarding 11 different RSEP requests.
Note: The RSEP forum was originally created in October 2006 for a single comment space for RSEP requests. The table below is a summary of comments submitted to the RSEP forum. RSEP requests that did not receive comments in the RSEP forum were not included in the table.
| RSEP Proposal # | TLD(s) | Registry Name | Topic of Comment(s) | Comment: Number and Source | RSEP Status | Results |
| 2006003 | .org | Public Interest Registry | Excess Deletions Fee |
1 organization
1 individual
|
Approved |
One comment supported the adoption of the proposed service. One comment disagreed with the proposal due to concerns about perceived legitimization of practice of domain tasting and inefficacy of this service. Resolution from ICANN Board meeting authorized the President and the General Counsel to enter into an amendment of the Registry Agreement to implement the RSEP request. The amendment of the Registry Agreement was approved. |
| 2007004 | .tel | Telnic Ltd | UK/EU Data Protection legislation impact on ICANN contract |
1 ICANN community group
|
Approved |
The comment submitted to the RSEP forum was considered at a dedicated comment forum regarding the contract amendment to implement the proposed service (https://forum.icann.org/lists/telnic-whois-proposal/). The amendment of the Registry Agreement implementing the RSEP request was approved by the ICANN Board. |
| 2008007 | .info | Afilias, Ltd. | Abusive Use Policy |
3 organizations
2 individuals
|
Approved |
Some comments opposed the proposed service and raised concerns about the ambiguity of the proposal or suggested edits to the proposal. The RSEP request was revised and approved for implementation. |
| 2009004 | .com .net |
VeriSign, Inc. | Registry-Registrar Two-Factor Authentication Service |
1 ICANN community group
2 organizations
1 individual
|
Approved |
Some comments pertained to the proposed service's mandatory requirement for Registrars to provide the service. Some comments pertained to insufficient consultation. The RSEP request was approved for implementation as a voluntary optional service. Further consultation regarding whether the Registrar-Registry Agreement (RRA) needed to be amended was advised, and ICANN communicated that if sections in the RRA dealing with authentication were to be updated following the consultation, ICANN would publish a revised RRA for comment under established procedure. |
| 2009005 | .com .name .net |
VeriSign, Inc. | Registry Lock Service |
1 organization
1 individual
|
Approved |
The comments raised concerns regarding pricing of the proposed service. The RSEP request was approved for implementation. |
| 2009007 | .com .name .net |
VeriSign, Inc. | Domain Name WhoWas |
1 ICANN community group
1 organization
|
Approved |
The comments raised concerns regarding lack of a formal process to ensure that consultation with registrars take place. The RSEP request was approved for implementation. |
| 2010004 | .com .name .net |
VeriSign, Inc. | Domain Name Exchange |
2 ICANN community groups
2 Individuals
|
Withdrawn |
Comments cautioned ICANN staff against approval of the request or, alternatively, to provide more time to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed service and provide opportunity for a formal public comment period. The RSEP request was withdrawn. |
| 2010011 | .mobi | mTLD Ltd. | Additional equitable allocation options for .MOBI one and two character domains |
1 organization
|
Approved, Pending Contract Amendment |
The comment submitted to the RSEP forum opposing the RSEP request was considered at a dedicated comment forum (http://forum.icann.org/lists/mobi-rsep-2010011/). ICANN published the amendment to the Registry Agreement for Public Comment, and the amendment completed its public comment period. The amendment has not been executed to date (XX August 2016). |
| 2011008 | .com .name .net |
VeriSign, Inc. | Verisign Anti-Abuse Domain Use Policy |
2 organizations
7 individuals
|
Withdrawn |
The comments opposed the RSEP request due to perceived lack of due process or, alternatively, suggested substantial edits to the RSEP request. The RSEP request was withdrawn. |
| 2012003 | .name | VeriSign Inc. | Redemption Grace Period for .name |
1 ICANN community group
|
Approved |
The comment was in favor of the RSEP request. The provisions reflecting the amendments of three new proposed services (#2012001, #2012002, #2012003) were incorporated in the Registry Agreement renewal. |
| 2014154 | .xyz .college .rent .theatre .protection .security |
XYZ.COM LLC | Chinese Gateway |
3 individuals
|
Withdrawn |
The comments raised concerns about governmental censorship. The RSEP request was withdrawn. |
Appendix 1
| Types | Service Description | Total Requests | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 |
| Abuse Prevention | Anti-Abuse Policy | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| Registry Lock Service | 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | ||||||
| Registry-Registrar Two-Factor Authentication Service | 2 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||
| DNS | DNS Update Service | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||
| DNSSEC Implementation | 9 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 1 | ||||||||
| SaaS Feedback Platform | 3 | 1 | 2 | ||||||||||
| Third Level Domain DNS Support | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Wild card redirection in the zone, and Search function | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Domain Registration Programs | DPML (Domains Protected Marks List Service) | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||
| MPML (Minds and Machines Protected Mark List) | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Phased Allocation Program | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Phased Equitable Reallocation of Non-Compliant Sunrise Domain Names | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Technical Bundle for New gTLDs | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Third Level Domain Sales | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Internationalized Domain Names (IDN) | IDN Services | 78 | 1 | 1 | 21 | 47 | 8 | ||||||
| Registration Data Directory Services (RDDS) | Domain Name WhoWas | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||
| Expansion of RDDS | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Modification of RDDS | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Remove Searchable Whois | 2 | 2 | |||||||||||
| UK/EU Data Protection legislation impact on ICANN contract | 2 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||
| Registration Lifecycle | Bulk Transfer after Partial Portfolio Acquisition (BTAPPA) | 7 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 1 | |||||||
| Bulk Transfer of Partial Portfolio | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Domain Name Exchange | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Excess Deletions Fee | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Gateway Service | 3 | 3 | |||||||||||
| Modifications to the Existing Add Grace Period (AGP) | 2 | 2 | |||||||||||
| Modify handling of names pending verification | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Pre-registration gTLD Platform | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Redemption Grace Period | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Reserved Names | Country and Territory Names | 40 | 7 | 31 | 2 | ||||||||
| IGO Reserved Names | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| One, Two and/or Three Character name allocation, release and/or registration requests | 58 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 6 | 2 | 35 | 3 | ||||
| Release and allocation of previously-reserved IANA strings | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||
| Others | Data Escrow-ZoneFIle-Whois | 2 | 1 | 1 |