| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
 US Revises Rules on .gov Registrations
posted by michael on Tuesday April 08 2003, @03:30AM
ICBTollFree carries the text of the US Government's new regulations for the management of .gov, 68 Fed. Reg. 15089 (March 28, 2003), to be codified at 41 CFR Part 102-173. The rules set out who can register, and states that the General Services Administration may start charging for .gov domains in the future. Students of regulation will find these rules notable because rather than being written in bureaucratese, "The final rule is
written in a plain language question and answer format. This style uses
an active voice, shorter sentences, and pronouns. ... A question and its answer combine to
establish a rule." GSA is trying to be user-friendly.
|
|
 |
|
Some highlights:
Under these rules, .gov is limited to, "official
governmental organizations in the United States including Federal,
State, and local governments, and Native Sovereign Nations."
"GSA has the authority
to employ a system of collection that includes a one-time setup fee for
new registrations, which will not exceed $1000, depending on the level
of assistance that may be provided by GSA, and a recurring annual
charge that will not exceed $500 for all dot-gov domains."
GSA is not going to enforce a hierarchical geographic taxonomy:
To register any second-level domain within dot-gov, State
government entities must register the full State name or clearly
indicate the State postal code within the name. Examples of acceptable
names include virginia.gov, tennesseeanytime.gov, wa.gov, nmparks.gov,
mysc.gov, emaryland.gov, and ne-taxes.gov. However--
(1) Use of the State postal code should not be embedded within a
single word in a way that obscures the postal code. For example,
Indiana (IN) should not register for win.gov, or independence.gov; and
(2) Where potential conflicts arise between postal codes and
existing domain names, States are encouraged to register URL's that
contain the full State name.
(b) There is no limit to the number of domain names for which a
State may register.
Similarly,
To register any second-level domain within dot-gov, City (town)
governments must register the domain name with the city (town) name or
abbreviation, and clear reference to the State in which the city (town)
is located. However--
(1) Use of the State postal code should not be embedded within a
single word in a way that obscures the postal code; and
(2) Inclusion of the word city or town within the domain name is
optional and may be used at the discretion of the local government.
(b)(1) The preferred format for city governments is to denote the
State postal code after the city name, optionally separated by a dash.
Examples of preferred domain names include--
(i) Chicago-il.gov;
(ii) Cityofcharleston-sc.gov;
(iii) Charleston-wv.gov;
(iv) Townofdumfries-va.gov; and
(v) Detroitmi.gov.
A proposed rule was published in the Federal Register at 67 FR 34890, May 16, 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
[ Don't have an account yet? Please create one. It's not required, but as a registered user you can customize the site, post comments with your name, and accumulate reputation points ("karma") that will make your comments more visible. ]
|
|
| | |
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
US Revises Rules on .gov Registrations
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 1 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
|
|
While I don't mind some loosening of .gov rules to allow, to some extent, the registration of "vanity domains" by governmental entities instead of enforcing an overly rigid structure (because this might possibly curb the urge on the part of the "marketing types", with which even governmental entities seem to get infested, to get inappropriate .com names instead), I'm still not all that happy with their encouraging of less logically structured or consistent naming for local government sites; why is Cityofcharleston-sc.gov better than the existing format of ci.charleston.sc.us? That has the advantage of consistency, unlike the crazy quilt of names which can get registered by cities under the new rules (or, for that matter, in .com or .org as some do already).
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|
