Personal tools
You are here: Home InternetNZ Activity Archive SRS Implementation SRS Implementation Progress Report 27/10/01

SRS Implementation Progress Report 27/10/01

Business Rules and Processes

Over the last month Doug Mercer and I have visited .nz providers and Domainz to discuss the Business Process Model for the SRS and implementation issues. We have met with representatives from the following organisations:

  • Xtra
  • Clear Communications
  • Ihug
  • Telstra Saturn
  • Freeparking/Webfarm
  • Orcon Internet
  • Kiwilink Internet Services
  • Asia Online (NZ)
  • Voyager NZ
  • NZ Revolution
  • Interspeed Web Solutions
  • Wave Internet
  • Tetradom
  • Net Access
  • Digiweb NZ
  • Register Direct
  • Actrix Networks

In addition, the process model document has been emailed to the following .nz providers for comment:

  • South Net
  • Quik
  • Godzone

One organisation declined the opportunity for input and a couple of others did not return phone calls.

In total, the process model has been discussed and/or made available for comment to a range of .nz providers who are between them, managing 60% of all domain name registrations for .nz.

The process model is now finalised and a final document has been completed which incorporates the business relationships, processes and rules - The Framework and Business Rules for the Domain Name Shared Registry for .nz. The information in this document will be the basis for the presentations to providers in November.

Provider Presentations

The planning for these is now finalised and they will be held in the weeks of 5 - 12 November. Presentations will be held in Auckland (2), Hamilton, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin.

All accredited .nz providers will be invited plus all other providers that had 50 or more domain name associated with them as at the end of September. The overseas providers will be sent a package of material, with the opportunity to ask questions via email (or by phone as required).


The main contracts are 98% complete with minor tweaking required. The InternetNZ-registry contract has yet to be done and there are a number of international examples that will be used as the basis for this.

The contractual requirements have been deconstructed and included in the Framework and Business Rules document.

ccTLD Standing Committee

I have made little progress this month on the Council paper for this but a concentrated effort for a day over the next week will see this drafted. I propose this is deferred to the December council meeting.

Technical Implementation

You have now signed off the SRS Implementation Options paper prepared by Doug which recommends a hybrid approach for the development. For further details, see the attachment.

Doug has nearly completed the baseline project plan and budget for the system development and implementation.

External advice is also being sought on the security requirements for the SRS.


A number of issues relating to Domainz's future role have been raised in our discussions with .nz providers. I propose to document these issues and outline some future options for Domainz for the December Council meeting. Consultation with Domainz staff is also required (suggest this is timetabled for early 2002).

Domain Name Migration from .nz Providers to Registrars

This issue is going to require careful analysis and some robust legal advice before any business rules on the allocation of domain names to registrars can be communicated. The rules for the allocation of domain names to providers during the transition to the DRS were not documented although we have access to the general principles used.

I have requested a dump of data from Domainz for a couple of .nz providers to assess the variety of situations that will need to be covered.

Future Level of Domain Name Fees

Providers are naturally very interested in the monthly charges proposed for the SRS. At this stage, the only indication I have been providing is that they will be no more than $2/domain name/month but anticipate they will be less than this.

A costing model should be able to be developed over the next month as the development and implementation budgets are firmed up, as well as the ccTLD manager costs. There remain some "holes" (e g the ICANN contribution) where a best guess will have to be provided.

Rose Percival
SRS Implementation Manager
Shared Registry System

Technical Implementation Project

October Update (as at 19-10-01)

SRS Framework and Business Rules

Considerable effort has been committed over recent weeks into consulting existing .nz providers about their requirements for the SRS. The implementation team has visited Auckland, Hamilton, Wellington and Christchurch and has spoken directly to most of the top twenty .nz providers (based on the number of domain names they administer). These providers represent over 60% of registered domain names.

Providers were supplied in advance with a copy of the SRS Process Model document, which described, in business terms, the processes and rules envisaged for the system. As a result of this consultation, the process model was revised considerably, to the point where later versions of the document required very few changes. Currently, the rules from the process model are being incorporated into a broader document, SRS Framework and Business Rules, which will soon be placed in the public domain (through the InternetNZ web site).

Implementation Options

Over the past few weeks, various implementation options for the SRS were investigated. Two possible options were analysed in some detail: a) an integrated package solution that performs the majority of SRS functions; and b) a hybrid approach where 'off the shelf' software (ie. for the billing/accounting component) is combined with bespoke development (ie. for the register component). The hybrid approach proved clearly superior in terms of achieving desired outcomes. It is also likely that this approach will be the least costly of the two, possibly by a considerable margin. The hybrid approach was approved by the Implementation Oversight Committee.

Next Steps

The hybrid approach means that parallel implementation streams can be initiated for the individual components of the system. The primary area of focus is the development of bespoke software to interface with, and manage, the shared register. Work is under way to determine the process necessary to initiate this work. It is likely that an RFI/RFP will be issued to identify a suitable partner to define the technical architecture and develop a prototype system, followed by the full solution.

Document Actions