ICANN inherited a number of INT registrations when it assumed management of the zone. Since 2005, at least, and probably since 1998, only treaty-based organizations who meet the other criteria have been given registrations, to the best of my knowledge. I believe that ICANN uses an outside expert who has experience with UN treaty organizations to evaluate the requests for .INT registrations. -Barb Sent from my mobile.
On Nov 13, 2014, at 10:51 AM, Peter Koch <pk@DENIC.DE> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:28:32AM -1000, David Conrad wrote:
On Nov 13, 2014, at 8:05 AM, Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> wrote: The NCC should simply release ripe.int, as the historical reasons for it no longer apply. (FWIW, same goes for apnic.int. None of the other RIRs have similar domains.)
+1
this might be the exact wrong point in time. The NCC likely does not fulfill the eligibility criterie laid out in <http://www.iana.org/domains/int/policy/>, but obviously the registrations in INT benefit from a genaral protection of confidence. Also, the 'policy' document linked above does not provide for a revocation mechanism.
So, there is a registrant in INT interested in having key material published. What does it take to get INT sigend? What is the governing body? The 'policy' document bases itself on RFC 1591 but also says "The IANA no longer _grants_ .int domain names [...]". While this particular issue is out of scope, the text may be read as if "the IANA" was acting with its own authority rather than being a registry operator bound by some policy set by the competent body. So, again: who is to be convinced to make INT signed?
-Peter