Re: [ALAC] [IDN-WG] [APAC-Discuss] The Problem of IDNs
Hello, everyone. I trust that you have seen the CircleID article on Universal Acceptance of All TLDs by Stephane Van Gelder and the APTLD Oman meeting report on IDN, which I circulated earlier today. Next milestones to move the agenda forward on this issue for the At-Large: 1. ATLAS II Summit - the frame of the agenda could not be changed at this point for Saturday and Sunday (21-22 June). I would suggest that the issue be brought up by community members from the floor in relevant sessions so that others can be made aware of what this issue means to users of the global Internet. 2. A 30 mins briefing and discussion will be held on Monday 23rd June 2014 during the ALAC Meeting Hot Topic 3 - Universal Acceptance of IDNs - with Edmon Chung and Rinalia Abdul Rahim (16:45-17:15) (Moderator: Olivier Crépin-Leblond). 3. ICANN-staff organized session on the topic of Universal Acceptance - I expect a session will be held in London. Do attend that session as well to provide input to ICANN from the end user's perspective. Best regards, Rinalia
On 20 May 2014 22:28, Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>wrote: 3. ICANN-staff organized session on the topic of Universal Acceptance -
I expect a session will be held in London. Do attend that session as well to provide input to ICANN from the end user's perspective.
Suffice it to say that my PoV on UA is very, very different from Van Gelder's. The main problem identified by this topic is one of the domain industry's own making and should not be surprising to anyone who has been following the gTLD expansion. Indeed, it is telling that the push for universal acceptance is coming from the supply-side of the DNS (the domain industry) and not the demand side (non-speculative domain buyers and end users). Watching the domain industry trying to make its problem to be everyone else's problem is entertaining while it is sad. This is but the latest ICANN remedial gTLD effort, handled as adeptly as its other remedial efforts (such as Public Interest Commitments and the Applicant Support program, meaning not adeptly at all). Maybe ICANN will be more aggressive in this effort, for -- unlike the failures of PICs and Applicant Support -- failure in UA will directly result in reduced revenue. But I simply can't see greater desperation causing a magically elevated level of competence that hasn't existed before. As for UA in IDNs, the assertion by Van Gelder that the use of eight-bit characters for domain names is a massive innovation is preposterous. Approval of non-Latin scripts by the ICANN bureaucracy, almost two decades after the release of Unicode 2.0, is hardly a source of invention. The real innovation in helping users find Internet information is happening elsewhere, like at Google, Samsung, Facebook, Bitly and Baidu. Of course, as I have said in the past, if this problem persists long enough to result in the failure of most new gTLDs, the rest of the Internet -- and the global population -- simply won't care. The DNS is just one way to get where one wants to go on the Net. The world has already worked around the problem of finding Internet destinations already caused by ICANN policy, which makes fixing UA non-critical to the rest of us. I will do my best to attend the ICANN session on UA, at least for the entertainment value. - Evan
Evan, If you don't think it is a problem that is fine, but there are others who do and are working hard to address the problem. And they don't do it for the money or the domain name industry. Best regards, Rinalia On May 21, 2014 4:32 PM, "Evan Leibovitch" <evan@telly.org> wrote:
On 20 May 2014 22:28, Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>wrote:
3. ICANN-staff organized session on the topic of Universal Acceptance -
I expect a session will be held in London. Do attend that session as well to provide input to ICANN from the end user's perspective.
Suffice it to say that my PoV on UA is very, very different from Van Gelder's. The main problem identified by this topic is one of the domain industry's own making and should not be surprising to anyone who has been following the gTLD expansion.
Indeed, it is telling that the push for universal acceptance is coming from the supply-side of the DNS (the domain industry) and not the demand side (non-speculative domain buyers and end users). Watching the domain industry trying to make its problem to be everyone else's problem is entertaining while it is sad. This is but the latest ICANN remedial gTLD effort, handled as adeptly as its other remedial efforts (such as Public Interest Commitments and the Applicant Support program, meaning not adeptly at all).
Maybe ICANN will be more aggressive in this effort, for -- unlike the failures of PICs and Applicant Support -- failure in UA will directly result in reduced revenue. But I simply can't see greater desperation causing a magically elevated level of competence that hasn't existed before.
As for UA in IDNs, the assertion by Van Gelder that the use of eight-bit characters for domain names is a massive innovation is preposterous. Approval of non-Latin scripts by the ICANN bureaucracy, almost two decades after the release of Unicode 2.0, is hardly a source of invention. The real innovation in helping users find Internet information is happening elsewhere, like at Google, Samsung, Facebook, Bitly and Baidu.
Of course, as I have said in the past, if this problem persists long enough to result in the failure of most new gTLDs, the rest of the Internet -- and the global population -- simply won't care. The DNS is just one way to get where one wants to go on the Net. The world has already worked around the problem of finding Internet destinations already caused by ICANN policy, which makes fixing UA non-critical to the rest of us.
I will do my best to attend the ICANN session on UA, at least for the entertainment value.
- Evan
Sorry if I misstated. I did not mean to say that UA is not a problem, just that: - For Latin-script gTLDs, UA is primarily a problem for the domain industry but is of little urgency for end users - For non-Latin script gTLDs the problem is more important and ought to be addressed because of years of neglect. But let's not get caught up in hyperbole that calls this a massive innovation - Hampering the progress of UA is that its slowness to arrive has already forced alternatives to emerge, and these alternatives are already established and succeeding This is clearly of more interest (and urgency) in the IDN world because it has been so long in coming. However my larger point is that, given the success rate of ICANN in its previous remedial repair programs, ICANN itself might not be the best driver of a good UA program, especially in AP and EMEA. - Evan
Thanks for clarifying, Evan. The staff session is important because ICANN has to define its role and scope for dealing with UA. Staff is in the midst of gathering views and options. If there is a view on appropriate role and scope for ICANN in tackling the problem, that session would be a good place to raise it. At the moment, both views of limited and more expansive role are being advocated in the ICANN community. I think it is really important for the ALAC and At-Large to consider carefully what role is appropriate for ICANN to support end user needs on this matter. It would be good if the At-Large community had sufficient time to do this in London. My worry is that the 30 minute Hot Topic session may not be sufficient. Best regards, Rinalia On May 21, 2014 5:12 PM, "Evan Leibovitch" <evan@telly.org> wrote:
Sorry if I misstated.
I did not mean to say that UA is not a problem, just that:
- For Latin-script gTLDs, UA is primarily a problem for the domain industry but is of little urgency for end users
- For non-Latin script gTLDs the problem is more important and ought to be addressed because of years of neglect. But let's not get caught up in hyperbole that calls this a massive innovation
- Hampering the progress of UA is that its slowness to arrive has already forced alternatives to emerge, and these alternatives are already established and succeeding
This is clearly of more interest (and urgency) in the IDN world because it has been so long in coming.
However my larger point is that, given the success rate of ICANN in its previous remedial repair programs, ICANN itself might not be the best driver of a good UA program, especially in AP and EMEA.
- Evan
As I have stated, I lack faith that ICANN can address UA any more competently than it has tacked other potential public interest issues such as Applicant Support and PICs. Perhaps this time ICANN should take a supporting rather than leading role if success is the desired result. In advance of discussing ICANN's role, is anyone aware of other bodies that could take on the issue? - ASEAN? - ISOC's Deploy 360 program? - APNIC? - The registries using IDNs? - The DNA? Just wondering out loud.... On 21 May 2014 05:25, Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>wrote:
Thanks for clarifying, Evan.
The staff session is important because ICANN has to define its role and scope for dealing with UA. Staff is in the midst of gathering views and options. If there is a view on appropriate role and scope for ICANN in tackling the problem, that session would be a good place to raise it.
At the moment, both views of limited and more expansive role are being advocated in the ICANN community. I think it is really important for the ALAC and At-Large to consider carefully what role is appropriate for ICANN to support end user needs on this matter.
It would be good if the At-Large community had sufficient time to do this in London. My worry is that the 30 minute Hot Topic session may not be sufficient.
Best regards,
Rinalia On May 21, 2014 5:12 PM, "Evan Leibovitch" <evan@telly.org> wrote:
Sorry if I misstated.
I did not mean to say that UA is not a problem, just that:
- For Latin-script gTLDs, UA is primarily a problem for the domain industry but is of little urgency for end users
- For non-Latin script gTLDs the problem is more important and ought to be addressed because of years of neglect. But let's not get caught up in hyperbole that calls this a massive innovation
- Hampering the progress of UA is that its slowness to arrive has already forced alternatives to emerge, and these alternatives are already established and succeeding
This is clearly of more interest (and urgency) in the IDN world because it has been so long in coming.
However my larger point is that, given the success rate of ICANN in its previous remedial repair programs, ICANN itself might not be the best driver of a good UA program, especially in AP and EMEA.
- Evan
-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56
participants (2)
-
Evan Leibovitch -
Rinalia Abdul Rahim