prop · GS03175d2 · 2005-07-07 00:00:00 — En tiondel av de anställda säger att de upplever problem med det dagliga arbetet p.g.a. bristande IT-kompetens. En tredjedel av de större företagen (med fler än 100 anställda) anser att personalens bristande IT-kompetens har hämmat utvecklingen. Det finns således klara signaler på att det finns brister i IT-kompetensen hos den svenska arbetskraften. ITPS har även gjort en halvtidsutvärdering av den statliga bredbandssatsningen. har avsatt , där merparten skall användas till utbyggnad i områden där marknadsaktörerna inte själva har tillräckliga incitament att investera. Kommuner och län är involverade i denna process. ITPS anser att den väg som valdes, dvs. att involvera kommuner och länsstyrelser i processen, troligen var och är ett av de bästa alternativen. Tillvägagångssättet har bland annat skapat ett stort kommunalt engagemang och lyft upp IT-frågorna på kommunernas Givetvis finns nackdelar med den decentraliserade processen. Bland dem kan nämnas att det skapas många olika lokala system som är svåra att binda samman både när det gäller teknik, tjänster och ITPS konstaterar att det i IT-propositionen inte finns någon definition av vad som menas med tillit. ITPS konstaterar vidare att de åtgärder som föreslås i propositionen framförallt har samband med begreppen data- säkerhet och integritet, som bara kan svara för en del av tilliten till IT. ITPS bedömning av några användningsområden Vad gäller skolan betonar ITPS att staten bör ha klara mål för hur IT skall komma in i verksamheten och att staten i en fortlöpande utvärdering följer hur dessa mål implementeras i skolorna. ITPS vill betona att elevernas datortillgång förmodligen till allra största delen beror på till- gängligheten utanför skolan. ITPS bedömer att den svenska högskolan står sig relativt väl vid en ITPS anser att det pedagogiska utvecklings- arbetet framförallt äger rum i samband med utveckling av distansunder- Detta ställer frågan om hur erfarenheterna från detta arbete sprids till andra delar inte bara av högskoleväsendet utan till utbildnings- systemet i dess helhet. Den utveckling som skett efter Nätuniversitetets tillkomst bedöms som mycket positiv. Lärarhögskolorna borde enligt ITPS vara den naturliga länken för att överföra de erfarenheter som skapas i forsknings- och utvecklingsarbete ITPS anser att det är oacceptabelt att lärarhögskolorna i genomsnitt tycks vara mindre avancerade än ungdomsskolan när det gäller användandet av IT som pedagogiskt verktyg. Vad gäller kulturen saknar ITPS ett särskilt IT-strategiskt dokument som omfattar hela kulturområdet, men ITPS konstaterar att det trots denna brist ändå bedrivs en bred och avancerad IT-verksamhet. På vård- och omsorgsområdet konstaterar ITPS att det saknas en ge- mensam IT-infrastruktur och informationsstruktur inom sektorn och att en sådan infrastruktur är en grundläggande förutsättning för IT-samver- kan mellan huvudmännen. När det gäller demokrati och IT har ITPS avstått från att utvärdera uti- från ett övergripande perspektiv utan behandlar frågan från ett lokalt, ITPS framhåller att vad som skett i ett första steg är att dialogen mellan medborgare och offentlig sektor kring politiken och servicen individualiserats genom att en kontakt via Internet på många håll etablerats direkt mellan servicegivare och servicemottagare. har e-demokratiförsök i den snäva betydelsen deltagande i politiska rådslag haft starkt inflytande över lokal praktisk demokrati. Antalet försök är dock litet och resultaten inte entydiga. Vad slutligen gäller IT:s betydelse för ekonomisk tillväxt anser ITPS att det finns en mycket stor enighet om att den förbättrade kapitalför- djupningen, som varit möjlig genom ständigt fallande priser på IT- produkter och IT-tjänster, har varit en viktig faktor bakom den höjning av arbetsproduktiviteten som ägt rum inom de IT-användande sektorerna Enligt ITPS är det inte enbart investeringar i IT som gett detta resultat utan dessa måste genomföras tillsammans med organisa- toriska förändringar och utveckling av de yrkesverksammas kompetens. Uppföljning av e-Europas handlingsprogram: Mid-term Kommissionen publicerade en utvärdering av hur långt aktionsplanen e-Europa 2005 hade nått (eEurope 2005 , COM (2004) 108 final). En sammanfattande kommentar var att de flesta medlemsstaterna hade gjort goda framsteg i utrullningen av bredbandsaccess och i att göra offentliga tjänster tillgängliga on line. Några nyckelmeningar refereras nedan under sex rubriker: e-förvaltning: Stora skillnader finns bland medlemsstaterna i utbudet av e-tjänster. Utbudet växer men efterfrågan på dessa tjänster släpar efter. e-lärande: Uppkopplingen till IT-infrastrukturen fortsätter att öka. De nationella policydokumenten uttrycker höga ambitioner. e-hälsa: De flesta länder har utvecklat planer. e-handel: Data visar ökning i köp och försäljning on-line, men det krävs mer för att helt integrera IT i affärsprocesserna. Utvecklingen understöds av direktiv om e-signaturer, e-handel och upphovsrätt samt det godkända direktivet för offentlig upphandling. Bredband: Bredbandsmarknaden expanderar, även om konkurrensen är svag. Säkerhet: av har en formell säkerhetspolicy. En europeisk säkerhetsmyndighet inrättades . e-integration: EU rekommenderar införande av tillgänglighetsstandarder såsom riktlinjer för Web Accessibility Initiative () och gemensamma märkningsregler för tillgängliga webbsidor. Förteckning över remissinstanser avseende ITPS rapport En lärande IT-politik för tillväxt och välfärd A2003:015 Statskontoret, Delegationen för utveckling av offentliga e-tjänster, Invest in (), Försvarsmakten, , (Fi 2003:02), , Exportråd, , , , , , , , , , , , , Myndigheten för skolutveckling, , , Myndigheten för , Sunet, Statens ljud- och bildarkiv, , , , , , i , , , , (, statistik och informatik), , , (masskommunikation), , , /, , , , , , , , , , , , Statens museer för världskultur, Stiftelsen , Riksutställningar, Stiftelsen , och , , , , , , , , Verket för innovationssystem, , , , , , , Föreningen , , , , , , akademikers centralorganisation, i , , IT- Företagen, Gemenskapen för elektroniska affärer, , , , , Nationellt centrum för IT-användning (), Världsnaturfonden (WWF), , , , , , , , , , , , , SeniorNet, Transfer, , , , för Ungdomsorganisationer, TV4, Copyswede, Konstnärliga och litterära yrkesutövares samarbetsnämnd (KLYS), , , , , , 24-timmarsdelegationen. Principles for the Delegation and Administration of Country Code Top Level Domains In the five years since the issuance of RFC 1591, the Internet has evolved from a tool reserved for computer and networking research, to a global medium for commerce, education, and communication. The new realities of the Internet, including its increased importance as a vehicle for national economic growth, and the expanding and more diverse nature of the Internet community necessitated evolution in the traditional means of managing and administering Internet technical functions. As a result, DNS functions, including the administration of the DNS root server system, the development of policies for the registration and allocation of domain names, the coordination of Internet Protocols, and the delegation of Internet Protocol numbers are becoming more clearly delineated and formalised through the ICANN process. Similarly, the procedures and framework of accountability for delegation and administration of ccTLDs need to evolve into a more robust, certain, and reliable system as well. While evolution is needed, the principle of RFC 1591 remains sound: the manager of a ccTLD performs a public service on behalf of the relevant local community and as such the designated manager has a duty to serve this community. The designated manager also has a responsibility to the global Internet community. By global Internet community we do not mean any specific legal or international entity, but rather we interpret the term to refer to all of those who are affected by, now or in the future, the operation of the relevant TLD, because such operation may impinge on more than one jurisdiction and affect the interests of individuals and entities from both within the relevant country or territory and elsewhere. This is our interpretation of the meaning of global Internet community as it is used in RFC 1591. Objective of this Document The objective of this document is to suggest principles that will assist in the development of best practice for the delegation and administration of ccTLDs. These principles are intended to contribute to the development of models of: a communication between the relevant government or public authority and ICANN; a communication between ICANN and the delegee; and a communication between the relevant government or public authority and the delegee. For the purposes of this document, the following definitions apply: 3.1Alternative Dispute Resolution (or ADR) means any system of resolving a dispute other than by court litigation, and includes arbitration, mediation, conciliation and processes of administrative dispute resolution. 3.2Communication should include a law, regulation, agreement, document, contract, memorandum of understanding, or any other written instrument, as appropriate. 3.3Country code top level domain or ccTLD means a domain in the top level of the global domain name system assigned according to the two-letter codes in the ISO 3166-1 standard, Codes for the Representation of Names of Countries and Their Subdivisions. 3.4Delegation means delegation by ICANN/of responsibility for administration of a TLD in the DNS root. 3.5Delegee means the organisation, enterprise or individual designated by the relevant government or public authority to exercise the public trust function of a ccTLD and consequently recognised through a communication between ICANN and the designated entity for that purpose. The delegee for a ccTLD may be the relevant government or public authority itself or an oversight body designated by the relevant government or public authority, inasmuch as the administrative and management functions for a ccTLD may be contracted out by the delegee to another party and hence not performed by the delegee itself. 3.6Designation means designation by the relevant government or public authority of the delegee. 3.7DNS means domain name system. 3.8ICANN means the for Assigned Names and Numbers. 3.9Relevant government or public authority means relevant national government or public authority of a distinct economy as recognised in international fora as those terms are used in the ICANN Bylaws and GAC Operating Principles. 3.10Relevant local community means the local community in the context of the ISO 3166-1 code. This definition is specific to the purposes identified in this document and not broader. 3.11Top Level Domain or TLD means a domain in the top level of the global domain name system. 4.1The delegee of a ccTLD is a trustee for the delegated domain, and has a duty to serve the residents of the relevant country or territory in the context of ISO 3166-1, as well as the global Internet community (as that term is interpreted in the Preamble to this document). Its policy role should be distinguished from the management, administration and marketing of the ccTLD. These functions may be performed by the same or different entities. However the delegation itself cannot be subcontracted, sub-licensed or otherwise traded without the agreement of the relevant government or public authority and ICANN. 4.2No private intellectual or other property rights should inhere in the ccTLD itself, nor accrue to the delegee as the result of delegation or to any entity as a result of the management, administration or marketing of the ccTLD. 4.3Tradable goods and services may arise in the performance of other management and administrative functions attached to the ccTLD. 4.4The delegee should recognise that ultimate public policy authority over the relevant ccTLD rests with the relevant government or public authority. 4.5The delegee should work cooperatively with the relevant government or public authority of the country or territory for which the ccTLD has been established, within the framework and public policy objectives of such relevant government or public authority. 4.6The delegee, and the delegee's administrative contact, should be resident or incorporated in the territory and/or jurisdiction of the relevant government or public authority. Where the delegee, administrative contact or technical contact are not resident or incorporated in the territory and/or jurisdiction of the relevant government or public authority, it should nevertheless operate in a way that is consistent with the laws and public policy of that relevant government or public authority. Role of Government or Public Authority 5.1The relevant government or public authority ultimately represents the interests of the people of the country or territory for which the ccTLD has been delegated. Accordingly, the role of the relevant government or public authority is to ensure that the ccTLD is being administered in the public interest, whilst taking into consideration issues of public policy and relevant law and regulation. 5.2Governments or public authorities have responsibility for public policy objectives such as: transparency and non-discriminatory practices; greater choice, lower prices and better services for all categories of users; respect for personal privacy; and consumer protection issues. Considering their responsibility to protect these interests, governments or public authorities maintain ultimate policy authority over their respective ccTLDs and should ensure that they are operated in conformity with domestic public policy objectives, laws and regulations, and international law and applicable international conventions. 5.3It is recalled that () to ICANN has previously adopted the general principle that the Internet naming system is a public resource in the sense that its functions must be administered in the public or common interest. 5.4The relevant government or public authority should ensure that DNS registration in the ccTLD benefits from effective and fair condition of competition, at appropriate levels and scale of activity. 5.5To give effect to governments' or public authorities' public policy interests, governments or public authorities should ensure that the terms outlined in 9 are included in their communications with delegees. 5.6In making a designation for a delegee, the government or public authority should take into consideration the importance of long term stability in the administration and management of the ccTLD and in the DNS. In most cases, such stability may be best served through the designation of an organisation or an enterprise rather than a specific individual. 6.1A primary function of ICANN is to establish, disseminate, and oversee implementation of the technical standards and practices that relate to the operation of the global DNS. In this capacity, ICANN administers a range of technical Internet management functions, including: of policy for IP number block allocation; administration of the authoritative root server system; creation of policy for determining the circumstances under which new TLDs would be added to the root system; coordination of the assignment of other Internet technical parameters as needed to maintain connectivity on the Internet; and other activities necessary to coordinate specified DNS administration functions. 6.2Specifically in relation to the administration and operation of ccTLDs, ICANN's role is to develop and implement policies that fulfil the provisions of 10 below. Principles relating to Delegations 7.1 Where a communication between the relevant government or public authority and the delegee is in place, when ICANN is notified by the relevant government or public authority that the delegee has contravened the terms of the communication, or the term of the designation has expired, ICANN should act with the utmost promptness to reassign the delegation in coordination with the relevant government or public authority. 7.2Notwithstanding the urgent need for a communication-based regime for ccTLD designation, delegation and administration, in the absence of such communication between the relevant government or public authority and the administrator of the ccTLD, ICANN should, upon the tendering of evidence by such government or public authority that the administrator does not have the support of the relevant local community and of the relevant government or public authority, or has breached and failed to remedy other material provisions of RFC 1591, act with the utmost promptness to reassign the delegation in coordination with the relevant government or public authority. 7.3When ICANN notifies the relevant government or public authority that the ccTLD is being operated in a that threatens the stability of the DNS or of the Internet, or has otherwise breached and failed to remedy other material provisions of the communication between ICANN and the delegee, as outlined in 10, the relevant government or public authority should cooperate with ICANN to remedy this situation or effect the reassignment of the delegation for the ccTLD. 7.4With respect to future delegations or reassignment of delegations, ICANN should delegate the administration of a ccTLD only to an organisation, enterprise or individual that has been designated by the relevant government or public authority. 7.5Delegees should enjoy, in the execution of their responsibilities, the appropriate rights under applicable law, and should not be subject to discriminatory or arbitrary practices, policies or procedures from ICANN or the relevant government or public authority. In the event of a reassignment of delegation, registrants in the ccTLD should be afforded continued name resolution, or a reasonable period in which to transfer to another TLD. Principles concerning the Communication between the relevant Government or Public Authority and ICANN 8.1 The communication between the relevant government or public authority and ICANN, as outlined in 2, should include a designated point of contact within the relevant government or public authority, as well as the name and contact details of the recognised delegee and duration of this recognition. Either as part of this communication, or through a subsequent communication, the relevant government or public authority should copy to ICANN any communication established between it and the delegee, setting forth the terms and conditions of the designation and/or concerning the execution of the delegee's role and the management of the delegation. 8.2The relevant government or public authority should communicate to ICANN how it will require the delegee to abide by the terms and conditions outlined in 9 below. 8.3Recognising ICANN's responsibilities to achieve consensus in the creation of any new generic TLDs, ICANN should avoid, in the creation of new generic TLDs, well known and famous country, territory or place names; well known and famous country, territory or regional language or people descriptions; or ISO 639 Codes for representation of languages unless in agreement with the relevant governments or public authorities. Principles concerning the Communication between the relevant Government or Public Authority and the Delegee 9.1 The communication between the relevant government or public authority and the delegee should include the following provisions, a copy or summary of which should be forwarded to ICANN: 9.1.1Term, performance , opportunity for review and process for revocation. 9.1.2A commitment by the delegee to operate the ccTLD in the interest of the relevant local community and the global Internet community. 9.1.3A recognition by the delegee that the management and administration of the ccTLD are subject to the ultimate authority of the relevant government or public authority, and must conform with relevant domestic laws and regulations, and international law and international conventions. 9.1.4Confirmation that the ccTLD is operated in trust in the public interest and that the delegee does not acquire property rights to the ccTLD itself. 9.1.5Conditions to ensure the transfer of all relevant DNS data to a nominated replacement, if, for any reason, a reassignment to a new delegee is necessary. 9.1.6Conditions for the efficient and effective resolution of disputes arising from domain name registration. In so far as ccTLD registration policies allow or encourage registrations from entities or individuals resident outside the relevant territory, then the delegee concerned should implement dispute resolution policies that ensure that the interests of all registrants, and of third parties, including those outside their territory and in other jurisdictions, are taken into account. Dispute resolution policies should, to the greatest extent possible, follow common principles, including due regard for internationally recognised intellectual property, consumer protection and other relevant law, and be implemented by all delegees. The delegee should, so far as possible, implement alternative dispute resolution procedures conducted online, without precluding access to court litigation. 9.1.7The delegee's commitment to abide by ICANN developed policies as set forth in 10. 9.1.8Where ccTLD registration policies allow or encourage registrations from entities or individuals resident outside the relevant territory, the delegee commits to observe all ICANN policies applicable to such ccTLDs, not otherwise provided for in 10, except where the delegee is prohibited by law from, or instructed in writing by the relevant government or public authority to refrain from, implementing such other ICANN policies. 9.1.9The above terms and conditions shall apply to delegees, including delegees who are resident and/or incorporated outside the territory of the relevant local community. 9.2A delegee should not sub-contract part or all of the technical operations of the ccTLD registry without ensuring that the sub-contractor has the technical qualifications required by ICANN, and informing ICANN. 9.3In any sub-contracting of the technical operations of the ccTLD registry or administrative and management functions of the ccTLD, the sub-contract must state that the delegation itself is an exercise of a public right, not an item of property, and cannot be reassigned to a new delegee except in accordance with the provisions of 7. Principles concerning the Communication between ICANN and the Delegee 10.1 The communication between ICANN and the delegee should contain ICANN's commitment to: 10.1.1maintain, or cause to be maintained, a stable, secure, authoritative and publicly available database of relevant information for each ccTLD (see below); 10.1.2ensure that authoritative and accurate root zone information is generated from such database and ensure that the root servers are operated in stable and secure ; 10.1.3maintain, or cause to be maintained, authoritative records and an audit trail regarding ccTLD delegations and records related to these delegations; and 10.1.4inform the delegee in a timely of any changes to ICANN's 10.2 The communication between ICANN and the delegee should contain the delegee's commitment to: 10.2.1cause to be operated and maintained in a stable and secure the authoritative primary and secondary nameservers for the ccTLD, adequate to resolve names within the ccTLD for users throughout the Internet, and any sub-domains over which they retain administrative authority, and ensure that the zone file and accurate and up-to-date registration data is continuously available to ICANN for purposes of verifying and ensuring the operational stability of the ccTLD only; 10.2.2inform ICANN in a timely of any changes to the ccTLD's contact information held by ICANN;