Applicant Information

Does or will this RSP have a publicly verifiable, third-party certification (e.g. ISO 27001) held directly by the organization and relevant to the registry services under application?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have processes and controls to manage physical access to infrastructure and systems, including building access controls, security cameras and/or other sensors, physical environmental monitoring and safety equipment, and alarm systems related to the physical infrastructure?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have processes and controls to manage non-physical access to infrastructure, including network access from both internal systems and external Internet systems, intrusion detection systems, security information and event management systems, network firewalls, network segmentation and isolation, user identification and authentication, and authorization schemes?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have processes and controls pertaining to the selection of vendors and equipment suppliers, management and maintenance of assets while in use, procurement of assets, and safe disposal of assets?

Yes

Does or will this RSP routinely renew and keep safe all cryptographic material necessary for the operation of the RSP?

Yes

Does or will this RSP secure (e.g. encryption, tamper detection, etc…) at-rest data relevant to the operation of the RSP, including but not limited to DNSSEC if applicable?

Yes

Does or will this RSP secure (e.g. encryption, tamper detection, etc…) in-transit data relevant to the operation of the RSP, including but not limited to DNSSEC if applicable?

Yes

If applicable, does or will this RSP have security controls for data in virtualized environments, including controls relevant to both on-premises or private virtualization environments as well as public clouds, network isolation, memory isolation, process isolation, and hypervisor access controls?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have a senior executive primarily in charge of and responsible for security?

Yes

Does or will this RSP conduct background checks, both initial and on-going, of personnel and vendors relevant to the registry services under application?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement BCP 38?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement routing security of some nature, such as automated route filters, RPKI route origin validation, or other operational practices defined by the Internet Society and Global Cyber Alliance's Mutually Agreed Norms for Routing Security (MANRS)?

Yes

Describe the processes and procedures to be used to practice and ensure a successful KSK rollover for both emergency and non-emergency situations, including coordination with the DNSSEC RSP and IANA.

Please find our response in the supporting document.

Does or will this RSP have documented, regular, and active practices for the maintenance of hardware relevant to the registry services under application?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have documented, regular, and active practices for the maintenance, upgrading, and patching of software relevant to the registry services under application?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have documented, regular, and active practices for the lifecycle of hardware relevant to the registry services under application?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have documented, regular, and active practices for the secure development of software?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have documented contingency plans for extraordinary scenarios regarding the maintenance of hardware relevant to the registry services under application?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have documented contingency plans for extraordinary scenarios regarding the maintenance, upgrading, and patching of software relevant to the registry services under application?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have documented contingency plans for extraordinary scenarios regarding the lifecycle of hardware relevant to the registry services under application?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have documented contingency plans for extraordinary scenarios regarding the development of software?

Yes

Does or will this RSP use Infrastructure-as-Code (IaC) to manage all systems relevant to operation of the registry services under application?

Yes

Does or will this RSP use automated orchestration to manage all systems relevant to the operation of the registry services under application?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have at least two Tier III (as defined here: https://uptimeinstitute.com/tiers) or equivalent data centers having no inter-dependencies?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have on-site backups of registration data?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have off-site backups of registration data?

Yes

Does or will this RSP practice data retention policies with regard to backups of registration data?

Yes

Does or will this RSP practice documented standards regarding media and data backups for registration data?

Yes

Does or will this RSP practice regularly scheduled validation of registration data backups, separately from recovery practices?

Yes

Does or will this RSP practice regularly scheduled recovery of registration data backups?

Yes

Does or will this RSP forbid the use of production data in testing and/or development environments?

Yes

Does or will this RSP encrypt registration data at-rest in the data store?

Yes

Does or will this RSP encrypt registration data in-transit to and from the data store?

Yes

Does or will this RSP regularly and frequently renew the cryptographic material used for the encryption of registration data both at-rest and in-transit with regard to the data store in accordance with industry best common practices?

Yes

Does or will this RSP keep safe the cryptographic material used for the encryption of registration data both at-rest and in-transit with regard to the data store in accordance with industry best common practices?

Yes

Does or will this RSP use modern and known-secure cryptographic algorithms for the encryption of registration data at-rest and in-transit with regard to the data store?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 5730 (“Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)”)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 5731 (“Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Domain Name Mapping”)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 5734 (“Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Transport over TCP”)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 5910 (“Domain Name System (DNS) Security Extensions Mapping for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)”)?

Yes

If applicable, does or will this RSP implement RFC 5732 (“Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Host Mapping”)?

Yes

If applicable, does or will this RSP implement RFC 5733 (“Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Contact Mapping”)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 8334 (“Launch Phase Mapping for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)”)?

Yes

If applicable, does or will this RSP implement RFC 8748 (“Registry Fee Extension for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP)”)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP forbid access to contacts via EPP to registrars other than the sponsoring registrar?

Yes

Provide a list of all EPP extensions to be used that are registered in the IANA EPP extensions registry, and an attestation that all EPP extensions to be used are registered with the IANA as per RFC 7451 (“Extension Registry for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol”).

Besides the three base objects (Domains, Contacts, Hosts) the registry features the following EPP Extensions: RFC5910: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:secDNS-1.1 RFC3915: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:rgp-1.0 RFC8334: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:launch-1.0 RFC8748: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:fee-1.0

Does or will this RSP forgo the use of any EPP extensions which are not registered with the IANA as per RFC 7451 (“Extension Registry for the Extensible Provisioning Protocol”)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement and operate EPP according to the performance requirements defined in the standards established in Specification 10 of the ICANN Registry Agreement (version 2024)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have controls to prevent EPP misuse and ensure all registrars have fair and equal access to EPP per the standards established in Specification 9 of the ICANN Registry Agreement (version 2024)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 9325 (“Recommendations for Secure Use of Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS)”) notwithstanding RFC 5734 (“Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) Transport over TCP”)? Note: while RFC 9325 covers TLS and DTLS, EPP only uses TLS.

Yes

Does or will this RSP regularly and frequently renew the cryptographic material used to secure EPP communications in accordance with industry best common practices?

Yes

Does or will this RSP keep safe the cryptographic material used to secure EPP communication in accordance with industry best common practices?

Yes

Does or will this RSP meet the standards established in Specification 3 of the ICANN Registry Agreement (version 2024) with respect to EPP?

Yes

Does or will this RSP compartmentalize (e.g. virtualization) the EPP service in such a manner that each compartment (e.g. containers, virtual machines, physical machines) is dedicated to EPP (excluding system services such as monitoring, remote access and NTP)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 7480 (“HTTP Usage in the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)”)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 7481 (“Security Services for the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)”)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 8521 (“Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Object Tagging”) for all currently operated gTLDs?

Yes

Does this RSP plan to continue to implement RFC 8521 (“Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Object Tagging”) for all gTLDs operated in the future?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 9082 (“Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Query Format”)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 9083 (“JSON Responses for the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)”)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 9224 (“Finding the Authoritative Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Service”) for all currently operated gTLDs?

Yes

Will this RSP implement RFC 9224 (“Finding the Authoritative Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) Service”) for all gTLDs operated in the future?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement the ICANN gTLD RDAP Technical Implementation Guide?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement the ICANN gTLD RDAP Response Profile?

Yes

Provide a list of all RDAP extensions to be used.

The RDAP server uses the following extensions: icann_rdap_response_profile_1 (ICANN) icann_rdap_technical_implementation_guide_1 (ICANN) rdap_objectTag (RFC8521) redacted (RFC9537)

Does or will this RSP forgo the use of any RDAP extensions which are not registered with the IANA as per RFC 7480 (“HTTP Usage in the Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)”)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP meet the standards established in the Service Level Agreements specified in Specification 10 of the ICANN Registry Agreement (version 2024) with regard to RDAP?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement methods to prevent mining of registration data via RDAP?

Yes

Does or will this RSP implement RFC 9325 (“Recommendations for Secure Use of Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS)”) with respect to RDAP?

Yes

Does or will this RSP regularly and frequently renew the cryptographic material used to secure RDAP communications in accordance with industry best common practices?

Yes

Does or will this RSP keep safe the cryptographic material used to secure RDAP communication in accordance with industry best common practices?

Yes

Does or will this RSP meet the standards established in Specification 3 of the ICANN Registry Agreement (version 2024) with respect to RDAP?

Yes

Does or will this RSP compartmentalize (e.g. virtualization) the RDAP service in such a manner that each compartment (e.g. containers, virtual machines, physical machines) is dedicated to RDAP (excluding system services such as monitoring, remote access and NTP)?

Yes

Does or will this RSP meet the standards established in Specification 10 of the ICANN Registry Agreement (version 2024) with regard to RDAP and IPv4?

Yes

Does or will this RSP meet the standards established in Specification 10 of the ICANN Registry Agreement (version 2024) with regard to EPP and IPv4?

Yes

Does or will this RSP meet the standards established in Specification 10 of the ICANN Registry Agreement (version 2024) with regard to RDAP and IPv6?

Yes

Will this RSP meet the standards established in Specification 10 of the ICANN Registry Agreement (version 2024) with regard to EPP and IPv6 if requested by a registrar?

Yes

Will this RSP provide tools and mechanisms to Registry Operators for the purposes of automated processing and identification of abusive domain registrations.

Yes

Describe the EPP and RDAP status values as they relate to domain name registrations considered to be abusive registrations and those not considered to be abusive registrations.

Typically, abuse cases are forwarded to the registrar. In that case, the setting of domain status values is up to the registrar. Also, the following information might depend on the abuse policy of the Registry Operator, however, we provide a generic "lock" functionality for domains that most Registry Operators might use in their daily processing of abuse requests. This "lock" functionality comes in two different "flavours" - retaining or removing the domain from the DNS. The EPP and RDAP level status values of each of these two types of "lock" are as follows: "lock" status while retaining the Domain in the DNS: - serverUpdateProhibited - serverTransferProhibited "lock" status while removing the Domain from the DNS: - serverUpdateProhibited - serverTransferProhibited - serverHold When a domain name is not considered an abusive registration, the status values of the object follow the normal EPP lifecycle.

Describe the EPP and RDAP status values and their applicability to Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS).

Please find our response in the supporting document.

Does or will this RSP implement the Registry Operator-related elements of RFC9361

Yes

Describe all potential registration lifecycle(s) of domain names supported in the system.

The domain registration lifecycle follows ICANNs “Life Cycle of a Typical gTLD Domain Name” (http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/gtld-lifecycle.htm). By using this standard model lifecycle, Registrars have only minimal effort to become familiar with the registration procedures. The attached figure shows the lifecycle of a domain with the various states. Since the registry system supports the Redemption Grace Period (RGP) extensions as specified in RFC 3915, the domain states ‘REDEMPTION’ and ‘PENDING DELETE’ refer to the respective RGP states. A typical domain lifecycle is initiated by a create domain EPP command for an AVAILABLE name. The domain is now in a ‘REGISTERED’ state. Whilst in this state the information associated with a domain may be updated by the respective registrar (using the update domain command). A domain may also be transferred to another registrar (domain transfer, see detailed state diagram below). A domain is always registered for a specific period (maximum 10 years). At any time Registrars can manually renew domains (given that the maximum registration period is not exceeded). The registry system is also supporting an auto-renew option. The auto-renew option can be deactivated on the request of a Registrar (on a per-Registrar basis), but is enabled by default to ensure that domains do not expire unintentionally. When a domain is deleted by either the ‘delete domain’ command, or alternatively expires (not manually renewed and auto-renew disabled for the registrar), the domain first enters the ‘REDEMPTION’ state. Whilst in this state, a registrar is allowed to restore domains for the respective domain holder in case the non-renewal was unintentional. When the domain is successfully restored while in the REDEMPTION state (a restore report via EPP is required), the domain enters the ‘REGISTERED’ state again. Domains which are not restored after 30 days in the ‘REDEMPTION’ state enter the ‘PENDING DELETE’ state. Whilst in this state, a domain cannot be restored and will become AVAILABLE for re-registration after a period of 5 days. Note that domains do not enter the ‘REDEMPTION’ state when they are deleted within the add grace period. Instead, such a domain is immediately deleted and AVAILABLE for re-registration. For a description of grace periods that lead to a refund to the registrar, refer to the supporting document.

Describe the registration lifecycle(s) of domain names with respect to EPP status values and RDAP status values.

AVAILABLE: Allowed Transactions: create domain RDAP status values: n/a EPP status values: n/a REGISTERED: Allowed Transactions: update domain, transfer domain (request), delete domain, renew domain RDAP status values: server transfer prohibited (during first 60 days), active (after the first 60 days if not inactive and no other status value is set) EPP status values: serverTransferProhibited (during first 60 days), ok (after the first 60 days if not inactive and no other status value is set) REDEMPTION: Allowed transactions: restore domain RDAP status values: pending delete, server Update Prohibited, server Hold, server Transfer Prohibited, server Renew Prohibited, redemption period EPP Status values: pendingDelete, serverUpdateProhibited, serverHold, serverTransferProhibited, serverRenewProhibited, rgp:redemptionPeriod PENDING DELETE: Allowed Transactions: none RDAP Status values: pending Delete, server Update Prohibited, server Hold, server Transfer Prohibited, server Renew Prohibited EPP Status values: pendingDelete, serverUpdateProhibited, serverHold, serverTransferProhibited, serverRenewProhibited, rgp:pendingDelete PENDING RESTORE: Allowed transactions: update domain (including delivery of the restore report), delete domain, renew domain. RDAP status values: pending Delete, server Transfer Prohibited, pending Restore EPP status values: pendingDelete, serverTransferProhibited, rgp:pendingRestore Furthermore, the following status values may be set on a domains that may affect the allowed transactions or visibility in the DNS: serverUpdateProhibited / clientUpdateProhibited, serverTransferProhibited / clientTransferProhibited, serverDeleteProhibited / clientDeleteProhibited serverRenewProhibited / clientRenewProhibited serverHold / clientHold Also note that grace periods are included in EPP and RDAP: addPeriod autoRenewPeriod renewPeriod transferPeriod

Describe the nameserver host lifecycle, including relevance to EPP and RDAP status values, with respect to the lifecycle of domain names. This should include a description of nameservers as either attributes of domains or as host objects.

Please find our response in the supporting document.

If applicable, describe the contact lifecycle, including relevance to EPP and RDAP status values, with respect to the lifecycle of domain names and nameservers. Include a description of the deletion of orphaned contacts.

Please find our response in the supporting document.

Does or will this RSP be capable of removing orphaned glue in accordance with the standards established in Specification 6 of the ICANN Registry Agreement (version 2024)?

N/A

Describe how this RSP will meet the standards established in Specification 2 of the ICANN Registry Agreement (version 2024), and describe any other data escrow processes. This includes escrow extensions for data related additional registry services.

The Escrow file is generated by a monitored job on a regular schedule. If the job fails a retry police is in place and the 24x7 operations department is informed. The generated files get encrypted and signed according to the ICANN requirements and transfered via SFTP to the Data Escrow provider and on sucessful upload a report is sent to ICANN.

Does or will this RSP regularly exercise registry continuity actions?

Yes

Does or will this RSP be capable of transferring all applicable operations to another RSP as defined by the Material Subcontracting Arrangement Technical Questions?

Yes

Does or will this RSP participate in coordinated Emergency Back-end Registry Operator (EBERO) transitions, including but not limited to maintaining the DNSSEC chain of trust, of hosted gTLDs when the business relationship of this RSP and the Registry Operator is not in good standing?

Yes

Does or will this RSP monitor for faults inside its own network?

Yes

Does or will this RSP monitor for faults from a point outside any of its own networks?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have documented processes for aggregation and triage of faults?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have documented processes to mitigate faults once detected?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have processes to minimize faults during maintenance of systems, including both automated processes and manual change control processes?

Yes

Does or will this RSP have personnel capable of reacting to and mitigating faults 24 hours per day of every day of every year of service?

Yes

Provide documentation regarding any RSP functions currently being served for any gTLD, the domain names of the gTLDs, and all service disruptions for each gTLD in the past six months, where a service disruption is defined by Specification 10 of the ICANN Registry Agreement (version 2024).

We are RSP for the following gTLDs: - .berlin (MAIN / DNS / DNSSEC) - https://www.iana.org/domains/root/db/berlin.html - .hamburg (MAIN / DNS / DNSSEC) - https://www.iana.org/domains/root/db/hamburg.html - .versicherung (MAIN / DNS / DNSSEC) - also acting as the Registry Operator - https://www.iana.org/domains/root/db/versicherung.html - .ikano (MAIN / DNS / DNSSEC) - https://www.iana.org/domains/root/db/ikano.html In the last 6 months, we experienced no service disruptions for any of the listed TLDs.