[At-Large] A brexit problem that I heard about

Jean-Jacques Subrenat jjs at dyalog.net
Mon Aug 20 14:26:34 UTC 2018

Dear Colleagues,

I’ve been following this thread for some time, and would like to put in a few upstream remarks, not focusing on the DNS aspect, but rather on the wider consequences of Brexit:

- Brexit is not a negotiation; it is a decision by the government of one member state, acting upon the result of a national referendum, to serve notice to the European Union its decision to withdraw from the EU. Talking about ‘’Brexit negotiations’’ is misleading: there are rules for joining the EU, and for leaving it (article 50 of the Treaty). The current interaction between the UK and the European Commission (representing the other 27 members) is based not on some ''Art of The Deal'', but on international treaties which were freely entered into by all the member states when they joined, including the UK (1973 Treaty of Accession and subsequent binding treaties).

- The UK’s decision to withdraw from the EU involves treaty obligations and carries a swathe of consequences (remaining budget contributions, trade with third countries, etc.). The DNS aspects, which have been dealt with at length in this thread, are not imposed unilaterally by the EU, but are simply the technical consequences of the UK decision. Because of this fundamental fact, grounded in international law, any arrangement affecting Internet usage can only be worked out at a technical level, and is not amenable to some sort of political ‘’deal’’ between the UK and the EU.

- This is not to say that we should dismiss the DNS issues as unimportant. But the right way to go about that is not to incriminate EU directives (all of which, by the way, had to be accepted by London in order to be implemented), but on the premise that desirable outcomes are to be worked out not IN SPITE OF Brexit, but by looking its reality in the face, and working on from there. EURID, the European Commission, the European Council will not -in fact, cannot- do otherwise.

- In the UK there seems to be increasing awareness of the high cost of the UK leaving the EU, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/18/rethink-of-brexit-vote-may-be-necessary-ex-civil-service-head-warns-lord-kerslake . A reversal of Brexit seems unlikely, but with that slim possibility in mind, IMHO it would be the prime duty of those in charge of Internet and DNS matters in the UK to keep national procedures and regulations as widely compatible as possible with EU guidelines and best practices. Just in case.


Le 20 août 2018 à 16:21:31, Michele Neylon - Blacknight (michele at blacknight.com) a écrit:

The change isn’t New Year’s eve – it’d be March 2019


The issue is that the EC isn’t engaging constructively with registrars or our clients, so it’s a total mess.


Allowing existing registrants to keep their .eu domains would be the sanest way forward, but the EC doesn’t seem to be willing to discuss it.


And they’ve also started some insane plan about expanding who can qualify for a .eu domain name without any real thought into how that can be made a reality.


Oh the fun







Mr Michele Neylon

Blacknight Solutions

Hosting, Colocation & Domains



Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072

Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090

Personal blog: https://michele.blog/

Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/


Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty

Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845


From: At-Large <at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com>
Date: Monday 20 August 2018 at 14:35
To: Danko Jevtović <danko at jevtovic.rs>
Cc: At-Large Worldwide <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [At-Large] A brexit problem that I heard about



About EURID, I stand corrected, it is the EU who sets the rules. EURID only enforces them as operator.

I fully agree with you, it is all part of the global package and nobody wants to start showing what the possible compromise points will be. The problems, from the operation’s point of view, is that in case of no compromise they have to do the job overnight on New Year’s Eve and that this will happen before the Brexit deadline, so even if a negotiation will be successful in 2019 the TLD changes could have been effective already.

A big mess, where, as usual, politics dictates and common sense, once again, shows to be far less “common” than we think.




On 20.08.2018, at 13:53, Danko Jevtović <danko at jevtovic.rs> wrote:


I understand that it is not up to EURID, but to EC (European Commission), that hold the contract with EURID to manage to TLDs.


The problem seems to be that possible solution (grandfathering clause) cannot be discussed outside of the whole package of Brexit negotiations, effectively blocking any reasonable progress.




From: At-Large <at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org> On Behalf Of Roberto Gaetano
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 1:09 PM
To: bzs at theworld.com
Cc: At Large <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [At-Large] A brexit problem that I heard about


Hi Barry.
You might have a point in principle.
However the reality is that each TLD can decide its own rules, and therefore whether to be strict in terms of requirements - like for instance .bank - or loose - like for instance .com.
.eu has chosen the first approach, and has all right to do so. Whether EURID is willing to make an exception for Brexit - based also on the consideration that, as far as I know, they do not make continuous checking about whether the resistant still complies with the requirements - or not, I don’t know. Apparently not.

On 17.08.2018, at 19:31, bzs at theworld.com wrote:

Ok I'll say it...

How many of these affected *.EU domains were actually entities with
some sort of EU charter or relationship as the TLD was approved for in

I realize it's naive to point out that .NET was for networking
organizations and .ORG for not-for-profits etc. in a world where we
have .XYZ and .FAIL (must they really be FAILures?)

Ok that ship has sailed because no one wanted to enforce it as it
would interfere with maximazing domain sales in those TLDs.

But are we really supposed to get lathered up about those who now got
burned flouting all that?

What promise do those affected actually expect to be upheld? Chapter
and verse not "well, we assumed..."?

And, no, marching out one or two bona-fide examples doesn't quite rise
to a counter argument.

If there were only one or two or ten I'll guess they could be handled
since they would have always had a legitimae reason to represent
themselves with a .EU domain which one would hope would allow them
some explicit accommodation.

      -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs at TheWorld.com             | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD       | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
At-Large mailing list
At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org


At-Large mailing list
At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org


At-Large mailing list  
At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org  

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20180820/2058429f/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the At-Large mailing list