Dear colleagues, Regarding gNSO/ccNSO meeting and sync TLDs as a topic. I propose a different theme, because I have a feeling, that Sync TLD theme today has a very limited implication, refer to Board resolution: Whereas, the methodology to be taken by the IDN ccTLD manager to handle these particular instances of parallel IDN ccTLDs is, in the short-term, the only option available, but there are serious limits to where such an approach is viable in practice, so that it cannot be viewed as a general solution, and that consequently, long-term development work should be pursued; Whereas, significant analysis and possibly development work should continue on both policy-based and technical elements of a solution for the introduction on a more general basis of strings containing variants as TLD; My recommendation to gNSO and ccNSO councilors is to focus on interesting and “yet unknown” issues of “IDNs in non-IDN world”. Please find below a short list of issues to cover: IDNs in NON-IDN world The issues and problems for the end users, registrars and registries are very similar: this world is not ready for IDNs Support of browsers Overview of browsers behavior. DNS traffic cash-in: why local script goes to .COM? Why Google is my default for the IDN script / browser localization? How IDN development changes the food chain of typos, not-founds? Support of email Email functionality adds up to IDN popularity. Update on IETF. IDN code: “IDN-ization”, where to stop? IDN code гттп://президент.рф/постановления/пр иказ1.гтяр Community activities to get the thing done right what can be done jointly ccNSO / gNSO to speed up IDN support on application level? What should we demand? Best regards, --andrei From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2010 12:36 AM To: council@gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] Topics for Joint Meetings in Brussels Importance: High <<Survey for Board meeting with GNSO in Brussels.docx>> Assuming I didn’t miss anyone’s preferences, here is a summary of support for discussion topics in our joint meetings in Brussels: GAC/GNSO meeting 1. DAG 4, including morality and public order o Support: Bill, Jaime, Wolf, Mary o Oppose: 2. AoC, including A&T RT and next reviews o Support: Bill, Jaime, Wolf, Mary o Oppose: 3. RAA o Support: Chuck, Mary? o Oppose: 4. IDN ccPDP o Support: o Oppose: Chuck, If there are no objections by Monday, I plan to suggest to Janis that we discuss topics 1 & 2 with the GAC. And would like to request a volunteer (or volunteers) to draft a brief (less than 5 minutes) intro to each topic including any questions we might have for the GAC. Board/Staff/GNSO dinner meeting 1. There are rumblings that there are some on the Board who think this meeting has outlived its usefulness; in light of that, it might be useful to discuss the value or lack of value from both the GNSO and Board/Staff perspective. o Support: Chuck, Stéphane o Oppose: 2. What do Board members understand about the AoC commitment to promote competition, consumer trust, and consumer choice in the DNS marketplace, with a particular focus on GNSO work o Support: Rosemary, Wolf o Oppose: 3. ICANN and Internet governance directions o Support: Terry, Bill, Jaime, Rafik, Mary o Oppose: Wolf 4. DAG 4, including morality and public order o Support: Wolf, Mary Note that I sent the attached survey to Bruce Tonkin for the purpose of getting individual Board responses and asking Bruce what the best way of doing that would be. ccNSO/GNSO meeting 1. DNS-CERT o Support: Chuck, Bill, Mary o Oppose: 2. Synchronized TLDs o Support: Andrei o Oppose: If there are no objections by Monday, I will send these topics to Chris. Andrei has volunteered to prepare a brief intro to the Synchronized TLDs topic. We need a volunteer for the DNS-CERT to do the same.