PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS

G. SHATAN RESPONSE

RECOMMENDATION #1:

All two-character letter-letter ASCII combinations for existing and future country codes.

I am willing to support this recommendation, in order to preserve the unique character of 2-character letter-letter ASCII codes as ccTLDs.

This should not extend to any two-character codes involving numbers or non-ASCII characters.  First, these are not within our remit (see WT2).  Second, they do not share the unique character that letter-letter codes have.

RECOMMENDATION #2:

Reserved and unavailable for delegation:

• alpha-3 code listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard.

I do not support this recommendation as written.  There is no history of alpha-3 codes being used as country identifiers in the top level domain name space.  In many cases, the alpha-3 codes do not have a special connection to the country listed, other than its use in the alpha-3 list.  Furthermore, at least 49 alpha 3 codes have other substantial meanings: as words in English or another language, as  an abbreviation with a commonly understood meaning (e.g., BRB), are already in use (COM) or could be confusing if used geographically (e.g., NIC).

RECOMMENDATION #3:

Reserved and unavailable for delegation:

• Long-form name listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard in the official language(s) of the country and the official UN languages.

I am willing to support this recommendation for long-form names in the official language(s) of the country and the official UN languages.  I would not support a recommendation to reserve long form names in all languages.

RECOMMENDATION #4:

Reserved and unavailable for delegation:

• Short-form name listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard in the official languages of the country and the official UN languages.

Same as Recommendation 3.

RECOMMENDATION #5:

Reserved and unavailable for delegation:

• Short- or long-form name associated with a code that has been designated as “exceptionally reserved” by the ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency.

This needs to be clarified, and the list of names provided to the group.  If these are country or territory names, they should already be covered in 3 and 4.  If these are not country or territory names, they should be reviewed and discussed as a group (if possible) or on a case-by-case basis.

RECOMMENDATION #6:

A country and territory name which is reserved and unavailable for delegation:

• separable component of a country name designated on the “Separable Country Names List.” This list is included as an appendix to the 2012 Applicant Guidebook.
• The Work Track recommends narrowing reserved names to official languages of the country and the official UN languages.

This involves (i) country names comprised of multiple compounded parts (e.g., Bosnia and Herzegovina) and (ii) Countries commonly known by a smaller constituent part than the short-form name listed in the ISO 3166-1 standard (e.g., (Netherlands) Antilles).

I am willing to support this, consistent with my view on 3 and 4 above.

RECOMMENDATION #7:

Reserved and unavailable for delegation:

• permutation or transposition of any of the names included in items (i) through (v). Permutations include removal of spaces, insertion of punctuation, and addition or removal of grammatical articles like “the.” A transposition is considered a change in the sequence of the long or short–form name, for example, “RepublicCzech” or “IslandsCayman.”

Permutations should apply only to long and short form country and territory names and NOT to alpha 2 or alpha 3 letter codes.

I am willing to support permutations for long and short country names and the separable components (i.e., 3, 4 and 6 above).

I do not support permutations for alpha 2 or 3 letter codes.

RECOMMENDATION #8:

Reserved and unavailable for delegation:

• name by which a country is commonly known, as demonstrated by evidence that the country is recognized by that name by an intergovernmental or treaty organization.

Needs further review.

Do we have examples where this was invoked, or any other examples?