Hi Justine: So noted and I fully understand the state of play now. If you look a little closer you would see the outline for the string similarity review right there; with the listing carried in the reserved name list for gTLDs, invoke Spec 5 of the RA and have a good faith reviewer known to everybody; the GAC. Thereafter if some string emerge from the mist and an objector - not just the IGO/INGO - thinks it is similar and would likely be confusing, string similarity review has a well-defined substrate. The negotiation is around known values. Just a different way of thinking about these things. Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 at 18:53, Justine Chew <justine.chew.icann@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Carlton,
All true save that in 2013 there was no in depth consideration of the impact of string similarity review on the protection that you described. Which is the substance of what we're dealing with now.
Kind regards, Justine
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 at 03:22, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:
Whaddya know, we are suckers for punishment. Hard to believe this discussion is still alive — thirteen years later.
The question we set out to answer back in 2012 was simple: Should IGO and INGO identifiers — in full or by alias — be protected in the domain name space?
The community consensus was yes. These organizations play a vital role in global governance and humanitarian affairs, and their names should not be open to misuse or misrepresentation.
What came next should have been equally straightforward. In 2013, we - read Evan and I - proposed a practical, transparent approach:
· Compile a definitive list of IGO/INGO identifiers, similar to the reserved names list.
· Restrict delegation of these strings — in exact match or recognized alias — to the relevant IGO or INGO and only on their affirmative request.
· Review and update the list periodically, aligned with each round of domain expansion.
· Empower the GAC to validate additions or modifications.
Simple. Predictable. Fair.
More than a decade later, still circling the same issue. Somewhere between good intentions, policy complexity, and competing interests, clarity got lost. If memory serves, we never managed to convince the NCSG. My interest ran out.
The pity is the first principles are still operative: protect what needs protecting, keep the process clean and move on.
Carlton
============================== *Carlton A Samuels*
*Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
On Wed, 8 Oct 2025 at 07:43, Justine Chew via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote:
Dear ALAC colleagues,
At the CPWG call of 24 Sep, it was established that the ALAC/At-Large are supportive of the position that, very simply put, IGO/INGO Identifiers should be protected for the relevant IGO/INGO to apply if and when they choose to, and that this ability to apply should be preserved under all circumstances and certainly, not displaced by a third party's attempt to obtain a confusingly similar string.
There is now an Option 3 being put before GNSO Council, and I plan to speak to this very briefly at today's CPWG call. In line with the ALAC position previously established and in anticipation of CPWG's reaction to Option 3, here is the draft that I am still working to shorten in time for the GNSO Council Extraordinary Meeting on 9 Oct at 13:00 UTC.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kjVLdF8zMiLDWkFJEo2wMPzvcmU9Ej30qMeO7yWJ...
I am sharing this in advance with the ALAC, in case any of you have (immediate) input to provide. Due to the short turnaround time, I am asking, as I did on 24 Sep, for discretion to relay a version of the ALAC position to GNSO Council during the mentioned extraordinary meeting where a Council decision is expected.
Thanks,
*Justine Chew* At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) Liaison to the GNSO Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) At-Large website: https://atlarge.icann.org/ ------ _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.