In this .org Proposal, we will describe the technical systems, processes and expertise that Global Name Registry proposes for the .org Registry.

Global Name Registry is confident that it has the technical expertise and experience with all aspects of operating and administering a full generic top level domain (“TLD”) Registry System to transition and operate the .org Registry in a stable and efficient manner.

In this proposal, Global Name Registry proposes several technical improvements to the way .org is currently operating. All of these will be described in detail in the relevant sections of the .org proposal.  Highlights of the technical improvements Global Name Registry proposes are summarized below:

 

The Global Name Registry proposal significantly improve the operations of .org, at a much lower cost

1.     Near real-time updates of DNS and Whois. Instead of daily updates, as are implemented currently, Global Name Registry proposes to keep these services continuously updated. This will result in update times ranging from a few seconds to a maximum of 15 minutes.

2.     Moving the .org Registry from the RRP protocol to the more flexible EPP protocol. This is in line with IETF recommendations; however, Global Name Registry will simultaneously support both the RRP and the EPP during an 18 month period until all Registrars have been given ample time to modify their systems and processes. By doing this, Global Name Registry takes away any “sudden death” problems and eases the migration from RRP to EPP for Registrars.

3.     Moving the .org Registry from a thin to a thick Registry. Global Name Registry proposes to migrate the .org Registry from its current state: a “thin” registry where no contact information is stored at the registry level, requiring Registrars to operate the Whois service; to a “thick registry”: a state where objects in the Registry will be associated with contacts. Global Name Registry proposes to complete this migration over a long period during which dual operations both as thin and thick are supported. The process which will not be completed until each object has been updated. Moving objects from thin to thick will be optional for Registrars.  [If we are proposing to do a Whois II scenario for .org also, I would make this a requirement for registrars so that we don’t have conflicting Whois reports.  Registrars also would rather not operate Whois in compliance with ICANN standards, from what I understand.]

4.     Constant consistency checking of DNS and Whois. Global Name Registry has mechanisms in place to continuously and constantly verify that the content in the DNS zone files and the Whois data is an accurate reflection of the data in the Registry database. This improves the quality of the data and supports the near real time updates mechanisms Global Name Registry will put in place.

5.     Lower prices. Global Name Registry proposes to lower prices of Registry Services dramatically [what is “dramatically”?] compared to the current pricing structure. Global Name Registry demonstrates in the technical sections of this proposal that it has the systems and competence to make a more cost-effective system without compromising service to the Internet community. Global Name Registry’s experience with large scale Internet services using open source software and low cost, horizontally scalable hardware means that Global Name Registry can offer to .org a better service at lower cost.

 

Global Name Registry has Experience with the VeriSign system which will ease transition

Global Name Registry powers the current system for the .name TLD (launched on January 15, 2002) using systems internally developed and operated. Additionally, Global Name Registry has entered into an agreement with VeriSign, Inc. for services provided by VeriSign Global Registry Services (together, “VeriSign”)in connection with the provision of certain services for the .name registry.

Global Name Registry and VeriSign run similar and redundant services on each side of the Atlantic and have thereby created the world’s first inter-continental Registry. This gives a higher robustness and reliability for the .name Registry. The agreement gives VeriSign no operational control or other similar rights in the .name registry. (This agreement with VeriSign is described in more detail in Section C33)

While VeriSign will continue to provide services to Global Name Registry in respect of .name, for .org, Global Name Registry proposes to develop and run the .org technical system primarily using internal resources.

Since the VeriSign solution is largely redundant to Global Name Registry’s own systems, Global Name Registry is proposing to have all systems, hardware and software largely operated and owned by Global Name Registry.

Following successful transition of the .org TLD from VeriSign to Global Name Registry, there will be no further collaboration with VeriSign in connection with the entire continued operations and maintenance of the .org TLD.

That said, it is important to note that previous collaborations with VeriSign regarding the .name TLD has given both Global Name Registry and VeriSign significant and comprehensive understanding of the other’s systems and procedures. Each technical team of either company is known to have very high regard for the other. Global Name Registry believes that this solid relationship will contribute immensely to the ease of transition in connection with the .org registry.  Each company’s comprehension of and experience with the other company’s development process is likely to contribute significantly to the ability of both parties to effect a smooth transition.  Global Name Registry believes that this is a critical characteristic of the Global Name Registry application which distinguishes it from the balance of the applications that are likely to be submitted.

To be clear, in implementing the current technical system which existed prior to Global Name Registry’s collaboration with VeriSign, Global Name Registry had put into place virtually all of the required infrastructure  essential for executing the plan contemplated for .org outlined above. The system proposed for .org is described to a high level of detail in this .org Proposal, in particular Section C17, C18 and C22.

 

Choosing global name registry will create a European Super-Registry

As illustrated in the figure below, Global Name Registry currently operates a system with a large capacity, which exceeds minimum levels to run the .org registry, and can with small adjustments run all services and operations for .org. The Registry systems designed and built by Global Name Registry were designed to handle up to 25 million domain names. Global Name Registry has also planned the scalability to more than 50 million registered names, which under the system design can be easily accommodated with relatively simple measures like adding memory to DNS servers, moving Whois servers to solid state storage and clustering the main database. The scalability of the systems are described in more detail in Section C17.10.

The tables below illustrate to what extent Global Name Registry has built a majority of the systems necessary to operate and run the .org registry. The following table details the system components developed, owned and operated by Global Name Registry 

 

 

Current .name infrastructure
	Site location
Service	UK	Norway (failover site)	Hong Kong	USA 1*	USA 2*
DNS	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Whois	Yes	Yes	No	No	No
Redundant Databases (with failover)	Yes	No	No	No	No
EPP server	Has software	No	No	No	No
EPP client (for registrars)	Yes
Web	Yes	Yes	No	No	No
Update Handler	Yes	No	No	No	No
* currently outsourced for .name, but will be wholly owned and operated for .org

 

 

 

 

Proposed .ORG infrastructure
	Site location
Service	UK	Norway (Failover Site)	Hong Kong (plus 1-2 other DNS sites depending on need)	USA (2-3 sites)	Europe (1-2 sites)
DNS	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Whois	Yes	Yes	No	No	No
Database (with failover)	Yes	Yes	No	No	No
EPP server	Yes	Yes	No	No	No
RRP server	Yes	Yes	No	No	No
Web	Yes	Yes	No	No	No
Update Handler	Yes	Yes	No	No	No

 

Choosing Global Name Registry will create the largest and most modern Registry infrastructure in Europe. Global Name Registry will as the operator of .org have

1.     A world-wide fully self-operated DNS network, capable of serving more than 200,000 queries per second, or 17.2 billion per day. More capacity can be easily added to scale the capacity almost linearly.

2.     A centralized Whois source for .org, capable of serving more than 300 queries per second, or 26 million per day. More capacity can be easily added to scale the capacity almost linearly.

3.     A Registry connected to all ICANN Accredited Registrars through the EPP protocol while simultaneously supporting the legacy RRP for their convenience during a long period.

4.     A Shared Registry System capable of supporting potentially hundreds of Registrars, with up to 1500 database transactions per second, or 129 million per day. The system is designed to add more capacity when necessary.

5.     Updating the DNS and Whois services contents seconds or minutes after database updates happen.

6.     A fully redundant system that can fail over to another location in emergencies without significant loss of service

As a consequence, Global Name Registry feels uniquely positioned to efficiently and responsibly transition and operate the .org TLD. The descriptions in this .org Proposal, in particular Section C17, C18 and C22 will describe in detail how this will happen. Choosing Global Name Registry as the successor operator of .org will result in a stable and efficient transition, and better services to the community at large.