I wonder if the rule will be used to check against existing or future IDN ccTLD operators. In any case, I'd suggest that individual ccTLD should file response according their LGR rules at the 2nd-level. Ching On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@icann.org> wrote:
Dear all, Please find included advise from the Triage with respect to Guidelines for Developing Reference Label Generation Rulesets (LGRs) for the Second Level. The recommendation is*: No Action*
Please, let me know by Saturday, 11 December, in case you do not agree with Triage suggestion 50-2015. Thank you, Kind regards, Bart
== *Topic: *50-2015: Guidelines for Developing Reference Label Generation Rulesets (LGRs) for the Second Level
*Originator: *ICANN
*Summary of request: *To facilitate and improve consistency of testing and stability of registry operations of new gTLDs, ICANN is developing reference IDN tables in machine readable format, called Label Generation Rulesets (LGRs) for the second level, for use in Pre-Delegation Testing and the Registry Service Evaluation Process. Based on the process finalised after public comment, as the first step ICANN is releasing the Guidelines for Developing Reference LGRs for the Second Level: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/comments-lgr-second-level-2015-11-05-e...
*Date received: *5.12.2015
*Last day for Comments/input/response, if any: *15 December
*Recommended action, if any: *No Action
*Expertise needed, if any:* Technical
*Date of submission to Council: *9.12.2015
*Last date of Council decision: *11.12.2015
*Impact on ccNSO/ccTLDs: *Low
-- Ching Chiao Founder and CEO www.*Brandma*.co 中域国际集团 +886.918.211372 || +86.135.20187032 Beijing . Chengdu . Hangzhou . Hong Kong . Shenzhen. Taipei