Hi Danny, Annette I'm in complete agreement with you on the fact that IDN gTLDs now have a jump. And it is exactly for this reason that I've been pushing for 'fast-track' both at APTLD and as ALAC's liaison to ccNSO. On the other hand I don't think GNSO or gTLD operators are to blame for this state of affairs. If the work for a regular IDN ccPDP started right now, it'll another 2 1/2 to 7 years before anything comes out(Cf. ccNSO estimate). Further, any comprehensive effort in this direction will undoubtedly rekindle old GAC-ccOperator disputes on delegation issues; that's why many cc operators in countries not affected by IDNs have been at best apathetic toward IDN cc's and policy work has been delayed. I think our best bet at this time is to: 1. Support a fast-track initiative for those territories that really want IDN cc's and are not subject to local community conflicts on the issue. 2. Work hard to make sure that the next round of ICANN gTLD selections (that may include IDNs) do not discriminate against small operators from less developed countries. It is important that this issue be emphasized at the Oct 29 meeting in LA. Regarding the standards body for territorial scripts, the problem is that no such body has yet been identified or universally recognized. I'm sure ISO will not adopt a list that may include minority languages out of 'official' favor by a member government. Siavash
Hello Siavash,
ICANN can act based on what it considers to be "reasonable cause". One example of reasonable cause cited in the bylaws is "the promotion of effective competition".
Competition is not "effective" if one set of players can obtain a market advantage by having their class of TLDs launched before another set of players is ready.
In the IDN world, do we really want to see an advantage given to either IDN gTLDs or to the IDN ccTLDs by having one of these groups launched before the other?
While everyone recognizes the need to move forward and expeditiously with the implementation of IDNs, shouldn't we be considering the implications of "unfair advantage" on the marketplace?
The current schedule for the release of new gTLDs seems to be in advance of the scheduled release of new ccTLDs (even if a fast-track IDN ccTLD approach is adopted). Doesn't that concern you?
Personally, I think that slowing down the implementation of IDN gTLDs is indeed possible (if we choose to respect the principle of competition based on a level playing field).
With regard to the issue of an ISO list, just as RFC 1591 states: "The IANA is not in the business of deciding what is and what is not a country", so too should we be asserting:
"The IANA is not in the business of deciding what is and what is not a country's set of territorial scripts" -- this truly should be a matter for a standards body to determine through its processes. I remain of the view that ICANN, in its role as technical manager of the DNS, should only act when such a list is properly compiled.
regards, Danny
____________________________________________________________________________________ Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC
------------------------------------------------- IPM/IRNIC P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq. Tehran 19548, Iran Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113 Cell: (+98 912)104 2501 Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00 Email: shahshah@irnic.ir, shahshah@nic.ir ----------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------- IPM/IRNIC P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq. Tehran 19548, Iran Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113 Cell: (+98 912)104 2501 Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00 Email: shahshah@irnic.ir, shahshah@nic.ir -----------------------------------------------