response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review
Hi Everyone, As discussed on our monthly call yesterday, please find attached a draft for our response to the IDN ccTLD Fast Track review (http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-22oct10-en.htm). Hong / Charles / Cheryl, please help shepherd the document perhaps also through our WG model at the IDN WG... In any case, please provide your comments asap, we will try to take all the comments received by Jan 29 (Saturday), turn around a final version by Jan 30 (Sunday) for final circulation, and then submit our comments in at the end of Jan 31 in time before the close of the public comment period. Edmon
Dear Edmon, Many thanks for promptly drafting the document. I've some quick comments for your reference. *3. The issue of visual similarity of IDN TLDs is not a good measurement of confusing similarity. The new gTLD process should avoid the repeating of such mistake.* Could you kindly elaborate this? Do you believe measurement of confusing similarity should be extended to aural or meaning? *2. The implementation of IDN Variant TLDs at the root for Chinese IDN TLDs has proven to be successful. The same implementation, more specifically, concurrent NS delegations for the Primary and Preferred IDN Variant TLD strings, is the appropriate technical implementation for Chinese IDN TLDs, compliant with CDNC (Chinese Domain Names Consortium) recommendations, and is the current best approach to maintain the security and stability of the Internet.* Indeed Chinese Community has developed mature implementation measures for variant management. I fully agree what you state "Future applications for Chinese IDN TLDs with IDN Variants should follow a similar approach in terms of technical implementation at the root." However, ALAC had made statement that Chinese experience may not be generalized and its variant management may not be applicable to other scripts, such as Arabic. So it is a bit interesting to state it "is the current best approach", although it is no doubt the best for Chinese character set. Best, Hong On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Edmon <edmon@isoc.hk> wrote:
Hi Everyone,
As discussed on our monthly call yesterday, please find attached a draft for our response to the IDN ccTLD Fast Track review ( http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-22oct10-en.htm).
Hong / Charles / Cheryl, please help shepherd the document perhaps also through our WG model at the IDN WG...
In any case, please provide your comments asap, we will try to take all the comments received by Jan 29 (Saturday), turn around a final version by Jan 30 (Sunday) for final circulation, and then submit our comments in at the end of Jan 31 in time before the close of the public comment period.
Edmon
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
-- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China
Hi Hong, 3. was actually in response to the ".bulgaria" issue. Sometimes, within context, visual similarity does not mean actually causing confusion. So, I am saying actually the opposite... before an application is rejected simply because of visual similarity, other aspects need to be considered within the context of IDN. For example, 2 chinese characters may look alike to non-chinese speaking people, but for chinese speakers (within context) they could be clearly distinguished. 2. I had want for it to mean that it is the best approach for Chinese IDN TLDs. Perhaps should make it more clear. Edmon From: Hong Xue [mailto:hongxueipr@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 8:41 PM To: Edmon Cc: APRALO Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review Dear Edmon, Many thanks for promptly drafting the document. I've some quick comments for your reference. 3. The issue of visual similarity of IDN TLDs is not a good measurement of confusing similarity. The new gTLD process should avoid the repeating of such mistake. Could you kindly elaborate this? Do you believe measurement of confusing similarity should be extended to aural or meaning? 2. The implementation of IDN Variant TLDs at the root for Chinese IDN TLDs has proven to be successful. The same implementation, more specifically, concurrent NS delegations for the Primary and Preferred IDN Variant TLD strings, is the appropriate technical implementation for Chinese IDN TLDs, compliant with CDNC (Chinese Domain Names Consortium) recommendations, and is the current best approach to maintain the security and stability of the Internet. Indeed Chinese Community has developed mature implementation measures for variant management. I fully agree what you state "Future applications for Chinese IDN TLDs with IDN Variants should follow a similar approach in terms of technical implementation at the root." However, ALAC had made statement that Chinese experience may not be generalized and its variant management may not be applicable to other scripts, such as Arabic. So it is a bit interesting to state it "is the current best approach", although it is no doubt the best for Chinese character set. Best, Hong On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Edmon <edmon@isoc.hk> wrote: Hi Everyone, As discussed on our monthly call yesterday, please find attached a draft for our response to the IDN ccTLD Fast Track review (http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-22oct10-en.htm). Hong / Charles / Cheryl, please help shepherd the document perhaps also through our WG model at the IDN WG... In any case, please provide your comments asap, we will try to take all the comments received by Jan 29 (Saturday), turn around a final version by Jan 30 (Sunday) for final circulation, and then submit our comments in at the end of Jan 31 in time before the close of the public comment period. Edmon _______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org -- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China
based on the received feedback please find an updated version of the comment attached. I have asked for a couple more days to send in our comment. Would like to finalize and send out then. 2 main updates: 1. clarified that best current practice is for Chinese IDN 2. clarified issue on visual similarity Edmon From: Edmon [mailto:edmon@isoc.hk] Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:30 AM To: 'Hong Xue' Cc: 'APRALO' Subject: RE: [APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review Hi Hong, 3. was actually in response to the ".bulgaria" issue. Sometimes, within context, visual similarity does not mean actually causing confusion. So, I am saying actually the opposite... before an application is rejected simply because of visual similarity, other aspects need to be considered within the context of IDN. For example, 2 chinese characters may look alike to non-chinese speaking people, but for chinese speakers (within context) they could be clearly distinguished. 2. I had want for it to mean that it is the best approach for Chinese IDN TLDs. Perhaps should make it more clear. Edmon From: Hong Xue [mailto:hongxueipr@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 8:41 PM To: Edmon Cc: APRALO Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review Dear Edmon, Many thanks for promptly drafting the document. I've some quick comments for your reference. 3. The issue of visual similarity of IDN TLDs is not a good measurement of confusing similarity. The new gTLD process should avoid the repeating of such mistake. Could you kindly elaborate this? Do you believe measurement of confusing similarity should be extended to aural or meaning? 2. The implementation of IDN Variant TLDs at the root for Chinese IDN TLDs has proven to be successful. The same implementation, more specifically, concurrent NS delegations for the Primary and Preferred IDN Variant TLD strings, is the appropriate technical implementation for Chinese IDN TLDs, compliant with CDNC (Chinese Domain Names Consortium) recommendations, and is the current best approach to maintain the security and stability of the Internet. Indeed Chinese Community has developed mature implementation measures for variant management. I fully agree what you state "Future applications for Chinese IDN TLDs with IDN Variants should follow a similar approach in terms of technical implementation at the root." However, ALAC had made statement that Chinese experience may not be generalized and its variant management may not be applicable to other scripts, such as Arabic. So it is a bit interesting to state it "is the current best approach", although it is no doubt the best for Chinese character set. Best, Hong On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Edmon <edmon@isoc.hk> wrote: Hi Everyone, As discussed on our monthly call yesterday, please find attached a draft for our response to the IDN ccTLD Fast Track review (http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-22oct10-en.htm). Hong / Charles / Cheryl, please help shepherd the document perhaps also through our WG model at the IDN WG... In any case, please provide your comments asap, we will try to take all the comments received by Jan 29 (Saturday), turn around a final version by Jan 30 (Sunday) for final circulation, and then submit our comments in at the end of Jan 31 in time before the close of the public comment period. Edmon _______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org -- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China
Thanks, Edmon, for drafting and updating the comments. Charles, could the comment now be put into the APRALO policy-development process for review and formal endorsement? Hong On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Edmon <edmon@isoc.hk> wrote:
based on the received feedback please find an updated version of the comment attached.
I have asked for a couple more days to send in our comment. Would like to finalize and send out then.
2 main updates:
1. clarified that best current practice is for Chinese IDN
2. clarified issue on visual similarity
Edmon
*From:* Edmon [mailto:edmon@isoc.hk] *Sent:* Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:30 AM *To:* 'Hong Xue' *Cc:* 'APRALO' *Subject:* RE: [APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review
Hi Hong,
3. was actually in response to the ".bulgaria" issue. Sometimes, within context, visual similarity does not mean actually causing confusion. So, I am saying actually the opposite... before an application is rejected simply because of visual similarity, other aspects need to be considered within the context of IDN. For example, 2 chinese characters may look alike to non-chinese speaking people, but for chinese speakers (within context) they could be clearly distinguished.
2. I had want for it to mean that it is the best approach for Chinese IDN TLDs. Perhaps should make it more clear.
Edmon
*From:* Hong Xue [mailto:hongxueipr@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, January 26, 2011 8:41 PM *To:* Edmon *Cc:* APRALO *Subject:* Re: [APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review
Dear Edmon,
Many thanks for promptly drafting the document. I've some quick comments for your reference.
*3. The issue of visual similarity of IDN TLDs is not a good measurement of confusing similarity. The new gTLD process should avoid the repeating of such mistake.*
Could you kindly elaborate this? Do you believe measurement of confusing similarity should be extended to aural or meaning?
*2. The implementation of IDN Variant TLDs at the root for Chinese IDN TLDs has proven to be successful. The same implementation, more specifically, concurrent NS delegations for the Primary and Preferred IDN Variant TLD strings, is the appropriate technical implementation for Chinese IDN TLDs, compliant with CDNC (Chinese Domain Names Consortium) recommendations, and is the current best approach to maintain the security and stability of the Internet.*
Indeed Chinese Community has developed mature implementation measures for variant management. I fully agree what you state
"Future applications for Chinese IDN TLDs with IDN Variants should follow a similar approach in terms of technical implementation at the root." However, ALAC had made statement that Chinese experience may not be generalized and its variant management may not be applicable to other scripts, such as Arabic. So it is a bit interesting to state it "is the current best approach", although it is no doubt the best for Chinese character set.
Best,
Hong
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Edmon <edmon@isoc.hk> wrote:
Hi Everyone,
As discussed on our monthly call yesterday, please find attached a draft for our response to the IDN ccTLD Fast Track review ( http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-22oct10-en.htm).
Hong / Charles / Cheryl, please help shepherd the document perhaps also through our WG model at the IDN WG...
In any case, please provide your comments asap, we will try to take all the comments received by Jan 29 (Saturday), turn around a final version by Jan 30 (Sunday) for final circulation, and then submit our comments in at the end of Jan 31 in time before the close of the public comment period.
Edmon
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
-- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China
-- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China
Dear Hong and Edmon, For this one, because of the time constraint, let us circulate it for 48 hours (in this list) and see if we have any useful feedback, and if no objection, then we send in the comments?? Thanks! Charles On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Hong Xue <hongxueipr@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks, Edmon, for drafting and updating the comments. Charles, could the comment now be put into the APRALO policy-development process for review and formal endorsement?
Hong
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Edmon <edmon@isoc.hk> wrote:
based on the received feedback please find an updated version of the comment attached.
I have asked for a couple more days to send in our comment. Would like to finalize and send out then.
2 main updates:
1. clarified that best current practice is for Chinese IDN
2. clarified issue on visual similarity
Edmon
*From:* Edmon [mailto:edmon@isoc.hk] *Sent:* Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:30 AM *To:* 'Hong Xue' *Cc:* 'APRALO' *Subject:* RE: [APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review
Hi Hong,
3. was actually in response to the ".bulgaria" issue. Sometimes, within context, visual similarity does not mean actually causing confusion. So, I am saying actually the opposite... before an application is rejected simply because of visual similarity, other aspects need to be considered within the context of IDN. For example, 2 chinese characters may look alike to non-chinese speaking people, but for chinese speakers (within context) they could be clearly distinguished.
2. I had want for it to mean that it is the best approach for Chinese IDN TLDs. Perhaps should make it more clear.
Edmon
*From:* Hong Xue [mailto:hongxueipr@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, January 26, 2011 8:41 PM *To:* Edmon *Cc:* APRALO *Subject:* Re: [APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review
Dear Edmon,
Many thanks for promptly drafting the document. I've some quick comments for your reference.
*3. The issue of visual similarity of IDN TLDs is not a good measurement of confusing similarity. The new gTLD process should avoid the repeating of such mistake.*
Could you kindly elaborate this? Do you believe measurement of confusing similarity should be extended to aural or meaning?
*2. The implementation of IDN Variant TLDs at the root for Chinese IDN TLDs has proven to be successful. The same implementation, more specifically, concurrent NS delegations for the Primary and Preferred IDN Variant TLD strings, is the appropriate technical implementation for Chinese IDN TLDs, compliant with CDNC (Chinese Domain Names Consortium) recommendations, and is the current best approach to maintain the security and stability of the Internet.*
Indeed Chinese Community has developed mature implementation measures for variant management. I fully agree what you state
"Future applications for Chinese IDN TLDs with IDN Variants should follow a similar approach in terms of technical implementation at the root." However, ALAC had made statement that Chinese experience may not be generalized and its variant management may not be applicable to other scripts, such as Arabic. So it is a bit interesting to state it "is the current best approach", although it is no doubt the best for Chinese character set.
Best,
Hong
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Edmon <edmon@isoc.hk> wrote:
Hi Everyone,
As discussed on our monthly call yesterday, please find attached a draft for our response to the IDN ccTLD Fast Track review ( http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-22oct10-en.htm).
Hong / Charles / Cheryl, please help shepherd the document perhaps also through our WG model at the IDN WG...
In any case, please provide your comments asap, we will try to take all the comments received by Jan 29 (Saturday), turn around a final version by Jan 30 (Sunday) for final circulation, and then submit our comments in at the end of Jan 31 in time before the close of the public comment period.
Edmon
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
-- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China
-- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China _______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
-- * Charles Mok 莫乃光 Computancy New Media <http://www.computancy.com/>** **| **Smoothweb<http://www.smoothweb.com/> **|** **SocialPrint <http://www.socialprint.asia/>** **| **Innofoco<http://www.innofoco.com/> * *Social Media *| Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/charlesmokb> | Twitter<http://twitter.com/charlesmok> | LinkedIn <http://hk.linkedin.com/in/charlesmok> | 新浪微博<http://t.sina.com.cn/charlespmok> | Flickr <http://www.flickr.com/charlesmok> | Slideshare<http://slideshare.net/mok> *Blogs | charlesmok.hk | 信博<http://www.hkej.com/template/blog/php/blog_index.php?blog_blogs_id=4> | 一五一十部落 <http://www.my1510.cn/author.php?charlesmok> | IT360<http://www.it360.hk/> * *Emails* | charlespmok@gmail.com | charles@computancy.com | mok@isoc.hk ***Communities* | ISOC-HK <http://www.isoc.hk/> | The Professional Commons<http://www.procommons.org.hk/> | IT Voice <http://www.itvoice.hk/>
based on the received feedback please find an updated version of the comment attached.
I have asked for a couple more days to send in our comment. Would like to finalize and send out then.
2 main updates:
1. clarified that best current practice is for Chinese IDN
2. clarified issue on visual similarity
Edmon
*From:* Edmon [mailto:edmon@isoc.hk] *Sent:* Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:30 AM *To:* 'Hong Xue' *Cc:* 'APRALO' *Subject:* RE: [APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review
Hi Hong,
3. was actually in response to the ".bulgaria" issue. Sometimes, within context, visual similarity does not mean actually causing confusion. So, I am saying actually the opposite... before an application is rejected simply because of visual similarity, other aspects need to be considered within
context of IDN. For example, 2 chinese characters may look alike to non-chinese speaking people, but for chinese speakers (within context)
could be clearly distinguished.
2. I had want for it to mean that it is the best approach for Chinese IDN TLDs. Perhaps should make it more clear.
Edmon
*From:* Hong Xue [mailto:hongxueipr@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, January 26, 2011 8:41 PM *To:* Edmon *Cc:* APRALO *Subject:* Re: [APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review
Dear Edmon,
Many thanks for promptly drafting the document. I've some quick comments for your reference.
*3. The issue of visual similarity of IDN TLDs is not a good measurement of confusing similarity. The new gTLD process should avoid the repeating of such mistake.*
Could you kindly elaborate this? Do you believe measurement of confusing similarity should be extended to aural or meaning?
*2. The implementation of IDN Variant TLDs at the root for Chinese IDN TLDs has proven to be successful. The same implementation, more specifically, concurrent NS delegations for the Primary and Preferred IDN Variant TLD strings, is the appropriate technical implementation for Chinese IDN TLDs, compliant with CDNC (Chinese Domain Names Consortium) recommendations, and is the current best approach to maintain the security and stability of the Internet.*
Indeed Chinese Community has developed mature implementation measures for variant management. I fully agree what you state
"Future applications for Chinese IDN TLDs with IDN Variants should follow a similar approach in terms of technical implementation at the root." However, ALAC had made statement that Chinese experience may not be generalized and its variant management may not be applicable to other scripts, such as Arabic. So it is a bit interesting to state it "is the current best approach", although it is no doubt the best for Chinese character set.
Best,
Hong
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Edmon <edmon@isoc.hk> wrote:
Hi Everyone,
As discussed on our monthly call yesterday, please find attached a draft for our response to the IDN ccTLD Fast Track review ( http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-22oct10-en.htm).
Hong / Charles / Cheryl, please help shepherd the document perhaps also through our WG model at the IDN WG...
In any case, please provide your comments asap, we will try to take all
Hi Everyone, Seeing no further objections, I have taken the liberty to submit the comment: http://forum.icann.org/lists/fast-track-review-2010/msg00029.html Edmon From: charlespmok@gmail.com [mailto:charlespmok@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Charles Mok Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 12:18 PM To: Hong Xue Cc: Edmon; APRALO Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review Dear Hong and Edmon, For this one, because of the time constraint, let us circulate it for 48 hours (in this list) and see if we have any useful feedback, and if no objection, then we send in the comments?? Thanks! Charles On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Hong Xue <hongxueipr@gmail.com> wrote: Thanks, Edmon, for drafting and updating the comments. Charles, could the comment now be put into the APRALO policy-development process for review and formal endorsement? Hong On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Edmon <edmon@isoc.hk> wrote: the they the
comments received by Jan 29 (Saturday), turn around a final version by Jan 30 (Sunday) for final circulation, and then submit our comments in at the end of Jan 31 in time before the close of the public comment period.
Edmon
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
-- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China
-- Dr. Hong Xue Professor of Law Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China _______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org -- Charles Mok 莫乃光 Computancy New Media <http://www.computancy.com/> | Smoothweb <http://www.smoothweb.com/> | SocialPrint <http://www.socialprint.asia/> | Innofoco <http://www.innofoco.com/> Social Media | <http://www.facebook.com/charlesmokb> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/charlesmok> Twitter | LinkedIn <http://hk.linkedin.com/in/charlesmok> | <http://t.sina.com.cn/charlespmok> 新浪微博 | Flickr <http://www.flickr.com/charlesmok> | Slideshare <http://slideshare.net/mok> Blogs | charlesmok.hk <http://charlesmok.hk/> | <http://www.hkej.com/template/blog/php/blog_index.php?blog_blogs_id=4> 信博 | <http://www.my1510.cn/author.php?charlesmok> 一五一十部落 | IT360 <http://www.it360.hk/> Emails | charlespmok@gmail.com | charles@computancy.com | mok@isoc.hk Communities | ISOC-HK <http://www.isoc.hk/> | The Professional Commons <http://www.procommons.org.hk/> | IT Voice <http://www.itvoice.hk/>
participants (3)
-
Charles Mok -
Edmon -
Hong Xue