Dear all

         In London meeting, Kenny and I joined the coordination meeting and workshop, discussed with IP and representatives from K and J.

         Here are some conclusions and tasks for the next step:

1) Except for the coordination reason, the CGP Initial Character set will keep EXACTLY the same with CDNC table, to eliminate the unnecessary question of consistency and inconsistency from IP or other communities.

In other words, though there is no clear compulsory requirement for consistency between TLD and SLD, different experts expressed different opinions on the issue, the change to current SLD repertoire should be carried out restrainedly and conservatively.

If some modification request is ignorable, a safer way would be modifying CDNC table first.

2) Adding expert from Malaysia and some other area.

3) Kenny will ask Japan community and Korea community to confirm if they agree or disagree with the coordination rules described in Asmus’s slide (attached pdf 1) and ICANN document (attached pdf 2, appendix F)

Especially on the setting of “variant mapping” and “variant type”

CGP is fine with the proposed solution from ICANN, personally I hope it’s OK with J and K too.

But if J or K doesn’t accept that rule, we probably need a formal joint statement for IP, then we need to propose a new feasible alternative for IP, and of course, more negotiation with IP since they already published the attached PDF2 and went through public comments.

4) Our target is to finish the job before next ICANN meeting (October), it is not changed.

But it depends on the coordination rules for repertoire and variants.

Once the joint repertoire were made, I would be optimistic about instituting generation rules in a short time.

Otherwise, if we can’t reach an agreement with J and K, we won’t move a single step toward the generation rules.

Please voice your opinions as fully as possible~

Regards

Wang Wei