On Nov 13, 2014, at 2:32 PM, Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> wrote:
On 11/13/14 2:22 PM, Barbara Roseman wrote:
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.
FWIW, that policy definitely predates 2003, although I can't speak authoritatively as to how long it was in place before I joined the staff.
.INT was historically slated for dual purposes, intergovernmental treaty organisations and “international databases”. I believe the point of departure was the formalisation of .ARPA for the latter purpose, as documented in RFC 3712 in 2001. IAB produced guidance that infrastructure domains no longer be housed in .INT, see https://web.archive.org/web/20021005001140/http://www.iab.org/iab/DOCUMENTS/... Since then new .INT registrations have been limited to intergovernmental treaty organisations, but existing registrations like this (and others, the tpc.int gateway from RFC 1529 comes to mind as another example, as does sol.int for interplanetary Internet) were grandfathered. kim