two webinars to be held - ccPDP3 review mechanism
Dear All, This is an update in relation to the ccPDP3 final report public comment, to assist community members in providing feedback and comments, The ccNSO Policy Development Process Review Mechanism Working Group (ccPDP3WG-RM) will host two webinars to accommodate different time zones. * The first webinar is scheduled on 7 December 2022 | 8:00 UTC (1 hour) Zoom URL: https://icann.zoom.us/j/95804574031?pwd=N2RmbGtYdnIvcmhadUp4K3BZQzBkdz09<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://icann.zoom.us/j/95804574031?pwd=N2RmbGtYdnIvcmhadUp4K3BZQzBkdz09__;!!JSZLGTNg!VFc7L2zAY_Et9L7Lhbcy7BwZes2yA-cANvUumS2xdjBDUlFAtJagrC8TKUTkXNaFVOrBXJTj9SOX0kbFPTrQHwM$> | Meeting ID: 958 0457 4031 * The second webinar is scheduled on 7 December | 20:00 UTC (1 hour) Zoom URL: https://icann.zoom.us/j/94115804070?pwd=Z244dkdRcXc5TmxiNTdUZVhxQmxDdz09<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://icann.zoom.us/j/94115804070?pwd=Z244dkdRcXc5TmxiNTdUZVhxQmxDdz09__;!!JSZLGTNg!VFc7L2zAY_Et9L7Lhbcy7BwZes2yA-cANvUumS2xdjBDUlFAtJagrC8TKUTkXNaFVOrBXJTj9SOX0kbFW9T7uqQ$> | Meeting ID: 941 1580 4070 Kind regards Hadia
Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives."
I don't think that this is a "policy" change at all, but rather Goran speaking on his own behalf. I have heard very similar things recently (either when he spoke at the NARALO General Assembly or to At-Large at ICANN75). But given that one could (should?) presume that unless he qualifies his remarks as personal, he is speaking on behalf of ICANN Org, it would be a fair question to ask him. Or to ask our Board Member Leon. On a more general note, we have all heard (and spouted!) statements that the 2012 round was too focused on Latin TLD and going forward we want more IDNs. But saying that this is the (prime) intention of the program is not something I have heard. And I see little in the SubPro recommendations to imply that this will be the outcome. And the "not left to right" reference narrows it even further! Alan ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 4:18 PM To: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear All, The personal / official classification thought fair to ask anyone may be for a possible legal stand. In ethics it is invariably a personal best answer to move on. The reported "thunk" of Göran Marby at the IGF Townhall makes an interesting reading. IDNs [even way back in 2012] was a stiff technical challenge. There is considerable progress and despite UNICODE, the coercion into the steady state latin based gTLDs is both understandable and ineluctable. Just thinking aloud: Whether one likes it or not, the internet and related technologies have emerged from the strong technology innovations base of the english knowing part of the world. If something goes wrong one may have to be able to quickly peel off the veneer of IDNs and set things right on the latin based expertise. Safety matters. "In the end, only external factors matter. If I use a Web browser or live near a computer-controlled nuclear plant, little do I care whether the source program is readable or modular if graphics take ages to load, or if a wrong input blows up the plant." - Bertrand Meyer, Obect Oriented Software Construction, Interactive Software Engineering Inc, 1997. [This quote is in the context of Internal and External Quality Factors] Thankfully the business brought the domain names of all kinds into the "Programming Space". We can hope for logic and the language design will manage the desirable levels of safety. Hopefully, we can take advantage of this current context and build really non-latin methods. Anyways, it is for Satish Babu et al to comment on this. Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alan Greenberg via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: 02 December 2022 09:44 To: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question I don't think that this is a "policy" change at all, but rather Goran speaking on his own behalf. I have heard very similar things recently (either when he spoke at the NARALO General Assembly or to At-Large at ICANN75). But given that one could (should?) presume that unless he qualifies his remarks as personal, he is speaking on behalf of ICANN Org, it would be a fair question to ask him. Or to ask our Board Member Leon. On a more general note, we have all heard (and spouted!) statements that the 2012 round was too focused on Latin TLD and going forward we want more IDNs. But saying that this is the (prime) intention of the program is not something I have heard. And I see little in the SubPro recommendations to imply that this will be the outcome. And the "not left to right" reference narrows it even further! Alan ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 4:18 PM To: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear All, The personal / official classification thought fair to ask anyone may be for a possible legal stand. In ethics it is invariably a personal best answer to move on. The reported "thunk" of Göran Marby at the IGF Townhall makes an interesting reading. IDNs [even way back in 2012] was a stiff technical challenge. There is considerable progress and despite UNICODE, the coercion into the steady state latin based gTLDs is both understandable and ineluctable. Just thinking aloud: Whether one likes it or not, the internet and related technologies have emerged from the strong technology innovations base of the english knowing part of the world. If something goes wrong one may have to be able to quickly peel off the veneer of IDNs and set things right on the latin based expertise. Safety matters. "In the end, only external factors matter. If I use a Web browser or live near a computer-controlled nuclear plant, little do I care whether the source program is readable or modular if graphics take ages to load, or if a wrong input blows up the plant." - Bertrand Meyer, Obect Oriented Software Construction, Interactive Software Engineering Inc, 1997. [This quote is in the context of Internal and External Quality Factors] Thankfully the business brought the domain names of all kinds into the "Programming Space". We can hope for logic and the language design will manage the desirable levels of safety. Hopefully, we can take advantage of this current context and build really non-latin methods. Anyways, it is for Satish Babu et al to comment on this. Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alan Greenberg via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: 02 December 2022 09:44 To: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org>; mike palage.com <mike@palage.com> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question I don't think that this is a "policy" change at all, but rather Goran speaking on his own behalf. I have heard very similar things recently (either when he spoke at the NARALO General Assembly or to At-Large at ICANN75). But given that one could (should?) presume that unless he qualifies his remarks as personal, he is speaking on behalf of ICANN Org, it would be a fair question to ask him. Or to ask our Board Member Leon. On a more general note, we have all heard (and spouted!) statements that the 2012 round was too focused on Latin TLD and going forward we want more IDNs. But saying that this is the (prime) intention of the program is not something I have heard. And I see little in the SubPro recommendations to imply that this will be the outcome. And the "not left to right" reference narrows it even further! Alan ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2022 4:18 PM To: CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet. This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round. Bill Jouris. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com via CPWG<cpwg@icann.org> wrote: Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
+1 avri
On Dec 2, 2022 at 10:26 AM, <Bill Jouris via CPWG (mailto:cpwg@icann.org)> wrote:
I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet.
This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round.
Bill Jouris.
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android (https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...)
On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com via CPWG
<cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Hello All,
This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right."
I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 at 4:34:42)
When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
Michael
"One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives."
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org (mailto:CPWG@icann.org) https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
I agree. Not the best choice of words in a global context, but probably made sense for where Goran was at the time. But statements like this one can come back to bite the organization in the future. Two examples, 1. the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that). But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs. But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly. 1. IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at both the top and second levels. This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go. At the past GNSO meeting the GNSO agreed to give the IDN ePDP much more time to complete its work which is now in 2 phases. The first phase deals with most of the top-level issues, while the second phase deals with the second level. The Top-Level phase is supposed to come out with an initial report in April, but I am not sure if it will meet that deadline. But even if it does, we are talking about another year for a final report only on phase 1. Phase 2 will not be completed until 2025. So, although the rest of the process is moving forward with SubPro, there is a very real probability that some of the IDN gTLD issues may not be resolved by the time the new gTLD program is kicked off. Statements like this one, however, may cause people to argue that no new round should be launched until all of the IDN issues are resolved and would point to statements like this one from Goran as justification. After all, if the goal is to launch IDN gTLDs in the next round, how can you launch a next round if the IDN issues are not yet resolved? Some food for thought. [cid:image001.png@01D9063E.8A250040] Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Avri via CPWG Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 2:40 AM To: Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question +1 avri On Dec 2, 2022 at 10:26 AM, <Bill Jouris via CPWG<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet. This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round. Bill Jouris. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...> On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4%20> at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Context is everything. In the context of the IGF it makes perfect sense that Goran and other talking heads from ICANN would be pushing the global internet mantra. I’ve no idea if Goran’s comments were scripted or off the cuff, but I’d give him the benefit of the doubt here – due to the context of the remarks.
From a technical perspective it’s very clear that IDNs still face a LOT of challenges – the user experience with using them is far from ideal, though it has improved over the past 10 years.
The UASG’s recent paper on web hosting tools underlines this: https://uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular-web-hosting-tools-are-not-... regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Date: Friday, 2 December 2022 at 16:10 To: Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. I agree. Not the best choice of words in a global context, but probably made sense for where Goran was at the time. But statements like this one can come back to bite the organization in the future. Two examples, 1. the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that). But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs. But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly. 2. IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at both the top and second levels. This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go. At the past GNSO meeting the GNSO agreed to give the IDN ePDP much more time to complete its work which is now in 2 phases. The first phase deals with most of the top-level issues, while the second phase deals with the second level. The Top-Level phase is supposed to come out with an initial report in April, but I am not sure if it will meet that deadline. But even if it does, we are talking about another year for a final report only on phase 1. Phase 2 will not be completed until 2025. So, although the rest of the process is moving forward with SubPro, there is a very real probability that some of the IDN gTLD issues may not be resolved by the time the new gTLD program is kicked off. Statements like this one, however, may cause people to argue that no new round should be launched until all of the IDN issues are resolved and would point to statements like this one from Goran as justification. After all, if the goal is to launch IDN gTLDs in the next round, how can you launch a next round if the IDN issues are not yet resolved? Some food for thought. [cid:image001.png@01D9063E.8A250040] Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Avri via CPWG Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 2:40 AM To: Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question +1 avri On Dec 2, 2022 at 10:26 AM, <Bill Jouris via CPWG<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet. This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round. Bill Jouris. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...> On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4%20> at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Sounds like Michele and I are in agreement again this year.....wow, everyone remember 2022 :) Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC Jeff@JJNSolutions.com +1.202.549.5079 Http://www.jjnsolutions.com ________________________________ From: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 11:59 AM To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>; Avri <avri@doria.org>; Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Context is everything. In the context of the IGF it makes perfect sense that Goran and other talking heads from ICANN would be pushing the global internet mantra. I’ve no idea if Goran’s comments were scripted or off the cuff, but I’d give him the benefit of the doubt here – due to the context of the remarks.
From a technical perspective it’s very clear that IDNs still face a LOT of challenges – the user experience with using them is far from ideal, though it has improved over the past 10 years.
The UASG’s recent paper on web hosting tools underlines this: https://uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular-web-hosting-tools-are-not-... regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Date: Friday, 2 December 2022 at 16:10 To: Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. I agree. Not the best choice of words in a global context, but probably made sense for where Goran was at the time. But statements like this one can come back to bite the organization in the future. Two examples, 1. the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that). But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs. But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly. 2. IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at both the top and second levels. This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go. At the past GNSO meeting the GNSO agreed to give the IDN ePDP much more time to complete its work which is now in 2 phases. The first phase deals with most of the top-level issues, while the second phase deals with the second level. The Top-Level phase is supposed to come out with an initial report in April, but I am not sure if it will meet that deadline. But even if it does, we are talking about another year for a final report only on phase 1. Phase 2 will not be completed until 2025. So, although the rest of the process is moving forward with SubPro, there is a very real probability that some of the IDN gTLD issues may not be resolved by the time the new gTLD program is kicked off. Statements like this one, however, may cause people to argue that no new round should be launched until all of the IDN issues are resolved and would point to statements like this one from Goran as justification. After all, if the goal is to launch IDN gTLDs in the next round, how can you launch a next round if the IDN issues are not yet resolved? Some food for thought. [cid:image001.png@01D9063E.8A250040] Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Avri via CPWG Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 2:40 AM To: Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question +1 avri On Dec 2, 2022 at 10:26 AM, <Bill Jouris via CPWG<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet. This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round. Bill Jouris. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...> On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4%20> at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Of course, in the context of “new round enthusiasts” trying to motivate others, and using the prospect of IDNs to do so, it’s also understandable and carries with it the risks Jeff outlined. From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Date: Friday, December 2, 2022 at 1:36 PM To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com>, Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Sounds like Michele and I are in agreement again this year.....wow, everyone remember 2022 :) Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC Jeff@JJNSolutions.com +1.202.549.5079 Http://www.jjnsolutions.com ________________________________ From: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 11:59 AM To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>; Avri <avri@doria.org>; Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Context is everything. In the context of the IGF it makes perfect sense that Goran and other talking heads from ICANN would be pushing the global internet mantra. I’ve no idea if Goran’s comments were scripted or off the cuff, but I’d give him the benefit of the doubt here – due to the context of the remarks.
From a technical perspective it’s very clear that IDNs still face a LOT of challenges – the user experience with using them is far from ideal, though it has improved over the past 10 years.
The UASG’s recent paper on web hosting tools underlines this: https://uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular-web-hosting-tools-are-not-... regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Date: Friday, 2 December 2022 at 16:10 To: Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. I agree. Not the best choice of words in a global context, but probably made sense for where Goran was at the time. But statements like this one can come back to bite the organization in the future. Two examples, the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that). But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs. But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly. IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at both the top and second levels. This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go. At the past GNSO meeting the GNSO agreed to give the IDN ePDP much more time to complete its work which is now in 2 phases. The first phase deals with most of the top-level issues, while the second phase deals with the second level. The Top-Level phase is supposed to come out with an initial report in April, but I am not sure if it will meet that deadline. But even if it does, we are talking about another year for a final report only on phase 1. Phase 2 will not be completed until 2025. So, although the rest of the process is moving forward with SubPro, there is a very real probability that some of the IDN gTLD issues may not be resolved by the time the new gTLD program is kicked off. Statements like this one, however, may cause people to argue that no new round should be launched until all of the IDN issues are resolved and would point to statements like this one from Goran as justification. After all, if the goal is to launch IDN gTLDs in the next round, how can you launch a next round if the IDN issues are not yet resolved? Some food for thought. [cid:image001.png@01D9063E.8A250040] Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Avri via CPWG Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 2:40 AM To: Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question +1 avri On Dec 2, 2022 at 10:26 AM, <Bill Jouris via CPWG<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet. This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round. Bill Jouris. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...> On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4%20> at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Good evening : Our recent discussion of Göran Marby's comment at the IGF gives rise, to my mind, to several considerations. The GNSO Sub Pro report on new gTLDs <https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-repo...> (pp 400+, see Annexes I & J) was issued in January 2021, nearly two years ago. It did not respond to the issues raised by the Dissenting Opinions posted. ALAC has also sent to the Board extensive and detailed Advice on behalf of At Large, requiring several changes in the PDP Report's policy recommendations. Neither the Board nor GNSO have replied to or acted upon the ALAC Advice, albeit available on the ICANN website, translated into all our working languages. Consequently I consider that the proposed ODP procedure is premature. I am sure that when the outstanding requests for amendments and other criticisms of the PDP Report have been taken fully into account, the eventual ODP work would be substantially changed. Meanwhile the announced ODP risks wasting a lot of our time. Returning to the IGF and Göran's comment, I suggest that the context IS highly relevant, in relation to ICANN's obligations to the international community, in several respects. The international, global, interest in the DNS is NOT limited to IDNs. But the PDP Report provides minimal extension of protection to geographical names. Specifically for Africa, there are large populations in vast areas who are currently restricted to a single local ccTLD. In large parts of Asia, idem. The previous Round of new gTLDs was very largely engrossed with additional English language names. That enhanced, and did not attenuate, the English language bias in the DNS. It has also been to a large extent an economic failure. I have yet to hear any explanation or apology from the then Board Chair or CEO. We are still dealing with the fallout: lack of universal acceptance and concentration of the Registry/Registrar business through vertical integration and the acquisition of otherwise non-viable Registries. This was foreseeable at the time, and not acted upon by GNSO or the Board. Furthermore, should one wish to achieve the global balance, hinted at by Göran Marby's remarks, one would need significant Applicant Support, not only financial but also technical and human resources. The PDP was having none of this. If applicant support is as limited next time as it was last time, it risks comparable failure. This is also addressed in the ALAC Advice. Regards Christopher Wilkinson
On 3 Dec 2022, at 18:39, Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Of course, in the context of “new round enthusiasts” trying to motivate others, and using the prospect of IDNs to do so, it’s also understandable and carries with it the risks Jeff outlined.
From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Date: Friday, December 2, 2022 at 1:36 PM To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com>, Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question
Sounds like Michele and I are in agreement again this year.....wow, everyone remember 2022 :)
Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC Jeff@JJNSolutions.com +1.202.549.5079 Http://www.jjnsolutions.com
From: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 11:59 AM To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>; Avri <avri@doria.org>; Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question
Context is everything.
In the context of the IGF it makes perfect sense that Goran and other talking heads from ICANN would be pushing the global internet mantra.
I’ve no idea if Goran’s comments were scripted or off the cuff, but I’d give him the benefit of the doubt here – due to the context of the remarks.
From a technical perspective it’s very clear that IDNs still face a LOT of challenges – the user experience with using them is far from ideal, though it has improved over the past 10 years.
The UASG’s recent paper on web hosting tools underlines this: https://uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular-web-hosting-tools-are-not-... <https://uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular-web-hosting-tools-are-not-...>
regards
Michele
-- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ <https://www.blacknight.com/> https://blacknight.blog/ <https://blacknight.blog/> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ <https://michele.blog/> Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ <https://ceo.hosting/> ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Date: Friday, 2 December 2022 at 16:10 To: Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources.
I agree. Not the best choice of words in a global context, but probably made sense for where Goran was at the time.
But statements like this one can come back to bite the organization in the future.
Two examples,
the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that). But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs. But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly.
IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at both the top and second levels. This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go. At the past GNSO meeting the GNSO agreed to give the IDN ePDP much more time to complete its work which is now in 2 phases. The first phase deals with most of the top-level issues, while the second phase deals with the second level. The Top-Level phase is supposed to come out with an initial report in April, but I am not sure if it will meet that deadline. But even if it does, we are talking about another year for a final report only on phase 1. Phase 2 will not be completed until 2025.
So, although the rest of the process is moving forward with SubPro, there is a very real probability that some of the IDN gTLD issues may not be resolved by the time the new gTLD program is kicked off.
Statements like this one, however, may cause people to argue that no new round should be launched until all of the IDN issues are resolved and would point to statements like this one from Goran as justification. After all, if the goal is to launch IDN gTLDs in the next round, how can you launch a next round if the IDN issues are not yet resolved?
Some food for thought.
<image001.png> Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com <mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com <http://jjnsolutions.com/>
From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Avri via CPWG Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 2:40 AM To: Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question
+1
avri
On Dec 2, 2022 at 10:26 AM, <Bill Jouris via CPWG <mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote:
I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet.
This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round.
Bill Jouris.
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...>
On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org <mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Hello All,
This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right."
I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4%20>at 4:34:42)
When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
Michael
"One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives."
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org <mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg>
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy <https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy>) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos <https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Dr. Christopher Wilkinson, May I take the liberty of terming your notes as Critiques please. However, I respect your choice of the words due the western context that I think tends to position all notions of "personal" in a legal framework first. As you would appreciate, APRALO is quite active I hope they may want to docket the "technical dependencies" of going online vide the ONE INTERNET in the Aisa - Pacific region. I am sorry I could not find any recent report on any of the RALOs on these lines. I will be happy to be wrong on this. Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of lists--- via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: 05 December 2022 02:53 To: cpwg@icann.org <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Good evening : Our recent discussion of Göran Marby's comment at the IGF gives rise, to my mind, to several considerations. The GNSO Sub Pro report on new gTLDs<https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-repo...> (pp 400+, see Annexes I & J) was issued in January 2021, nearly two years ago. It did not respond to the issues raised by the Dissenting Opinions posted. ALAC has also sent to the Board extensive and detailed Advice on behalf of At Large, requiring several changes in the PDP Report's policy recommendations. Neither the Board nor GNSO have replied to or acted upon the ALAC Advice, albeit available on the ICANN website, translated into all our working languages. Consequently I consider that the proposed ODP procedure is premature. I am sure that when the outstanding requests for amendments and other criticisms of the PDP Report have been taken fully into account, the eventual ODP work would be substantially changed. Meanwhile the announced ODP risks wasting a lot of our time. Returning to the IGF and Göran's comment, I suggest that the context IS highly relevant, in relation to ICANN's obligations to the international community, in several respects. The international, global, interest in the DNS is NOT limited to IDNs. But the PDP Report provides minimal extension of protection to geographical names. Specifically for Africa, there are large populations in vast areas who are currently restricted to a single local ccTLD. In large parts of Asia, idem. The previous Round of new gTLDs was very largely engrossed with additional English language names. That enhanced, and did not attenuate, the English language bias in the DNS. It has also been to a large extent an economic failure. I have yet to hear any explanation or apology from the then Board Chair or CEO. We are still dealing with the fallout: lack of universal acceptance and concentration of the Registry/Registrar business through vertical integration and the acquisition of otherwise non-viable Registries. This was foreseeable at the time, and not acted upon by GNSO or the Board. Furthermore, should one wish to achieve the global balance, hinted at by Göran Marby's remarks, one would need significant Applicant Support, not only financial but also technical and human resources. The PDP was having none of this. If applicant support is as limited next time as it was last time, it risks comparable failure. This is also addressed in the ALAC Advice. Regards Christopher Wilkinson On 3 Dec 2022, at 18:39, Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Of course, in the context of “new round enthusiasts” trying to motivate others, and using the prospect of IDNs to do so, it’s also understandable and carries with it the risks Jeff outlined. From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Date: Friday, December 2, 2022 at 1:36 PM To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>>, Avri <avri@doria.org<mailto:avri@doria.org>>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com<mailto:b_jouris@yahoo.com>> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Sounds like Michele and I are in agreement again this year.....wow, everyone remember 2022 :) Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC Jeff@JJNSolutions.com<mailto:Jeff@JJNSolutions.com> +1.202.549.5079 Http://www.jjnsolutions.com ________________________________ From: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>> Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 11:59 AM To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com>>; Avri <avri@doria.org<mailto:avri@doria.org>>; Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com<mailto:b_jouris@yahoo.com>> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Context is everything. In the context of the IGF it makes perfect sense that Goran and other talking heads from ICANN would be pushing the global internet mantra. I’ve no idea if Goran’s comments were scripted or off the cuff, but I’d give him the benefit of the doubt here – due to the context of the remarks.
From a technical perspective it’s very clear that IDNs still face a LOT of challenges – the user experience with using them is far from ideal, though it has improved over the past 10 years.
The UASG’s recent paper on web hosting tools underlines this: https://uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular-web-hosting-tools-are-not-... regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Date: Friday, 2 December 2022 at 16:10 To: Avri <avri@doria.org<mailto:avri@doria.org>>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com<mailto:b_jouris@yahoo.com>> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. I agree. Not the best choice of words in a global context, but probably made sense for where Goran was at the time. But statements like this one can come back to bite the organization in the future. Two examples, the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that). But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs. But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly. IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at both the top and second levels. This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go. At the past GNSO meeting the GNSO agreed to give the IDN ePDP much more time to complete its work which is now in 2 phases. The first phase deals with most of the top-level issues, while the second phase deals with the second level. The Top-Level phase is supposed to come out with an initial report in April, but I am not sure if it will meet that deadline. But even if it does, we are talking about another year for a final report only on phase 1. Phase 2 will not be completed until 2025. So, although the rest of the process is moving forward with SubPro, there is a very real probability that some of the IDN gTLD issues may not be resolved by the time the new gTLD program is kicked off. Statements like this one, however, may cause people to argue that no new round should be launched until all of the IDN issues are resolved and would point to statements like this one from Goran as justification. After all, if the goal is to launch IDN gTLDs in the next round, how can you launch a next round if the IDN issues are not yet resolved? Some food for thought. <image001.png> Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com<http://jjnsolutions.com/> From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Avri via CPWG Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 2:40 AM To: Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com<mailto:b_jouris@yahoo.com>> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question +1 avri On Dec 2, 2022 at 10:26 AM, <Bill Jouris via CPWG<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet. This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round. Bill Jouris. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...> On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com<http://palage.com> via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4%20> at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi all, Thanks for copying me in to this discussion. We have a webinar planned for Dec 14 where we will present the ODA. Look forward to continue the discussion. Regards Goran Marby From: "lists@christopherwilkinson.eu" <lists@christopherwilkinson.eu> Reply-To: Christopher Wilkinson <cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> Date: Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 10:24 PM To: "cpwg@icann.org" <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Good evening : Our recent discussion of Göran Marby's comment at the IGF gives rise, to my mind, to several considerations. The GNSO Sub Pro report on new gTLDs [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/f...> (pp 400+, see Annexes I & J) was issued in January 2021, nearly two years ago. It did not respond to the issues raised by the Dissenting Opinions posted. ALAC has also sent to the Board extensive and detailed Advice on behalf of At Large, requiring several changes in the PDP Report's policy recommendations. Neither the Board nor GNSO have replied to or acted upon the ALAC Advice, albeit available on the ICANN website, translated into all our working languages. Consequently I consider that the proposed ODP procedure is premature. I am sure that when the outstanding requests for amendments and other criticisms of the PDP Report have been taken fully into account, the eventual ODP work would be substantially changed. Meanwhile the announced ODP risks wasting a lot of our time. Returning to the IGF and Göran's comment, I suggest that the context IS highly relevant, in relation to ICANN's obligations to the international community, in several respects. The international, global, interest in the DNS is NOT limited to IDNs. But the PDP Report provides minimal extension of protection to geographical names. Specifically for Africa, there are large populations in vast areas who are currently restricted to a single local ccTLD. In large parts of Asia, idem. The previous Round of new gTLDs was very largely engrossed with additional English language names. That enhanced, and did not attenuate, the English language bias in the DNS. It has also been to a large extent an economic failure. I have yet to hear any explanation or apology from the then Board Chair or CEO. We are still dealing with the fallout: lack of universal acceptance and concentration of the Registry/Registrar business through vertical integration and the acquisition of otherwise non-viable Registries. This was foreseeable at the time, and not acted upon by GNSO or the Board. Furthermore, should one wish to achieve the global balance, hinted at by Göran Marby's remarks, one would need significant Applicant Support, not only financial but also technical and human resources. The PDP was having none of this. If applicant support is as limited next time as it was last time, it risks comparable failure. This is also addressed in the ALAC Advice. Regards Christopher Wilkinson On 3 Dec 2022, at 18:39, Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Of course, in the context of “new round enthusiasts” trying to motivate others, and using the prospect of IDNs to do so, it’s also understandable and carries with it the risks Jeff outlined. From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Date: Friday, December 2, 2022 at 1:36 PM To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>>, Avri <avri@doria.org<mailto:avri@doria.org>>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com<mailto:b_jouris@yahoo.com>> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Sounds like Michele and I are in agreement again this year.....wow, everyone remember 2022 :) Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC Jeff@JJNSolutions.com<mailto:Jeff@JJNSolutions.com> +1.202.549.5079 Http://www.jjnsolutions.com [jjnsolutions.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__Http:/www.jjnsolutions.com__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-...> ________________________________ From: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com<mailto:michele@blacknight.com>> Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 11:59 AM To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com>>; Avri <avri@doria.org<mailto:avri@doria.org>>; Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com<mailto:b_jouris@yahoo.com>> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Context is everything. In the context of the IGF it makes perfect sense that Goran and other talking heads from ICANN would be pushing the global internet mantra. I’ve no idea if Goran’s comments were scripted or off the cuff, but I’d give him the benefit of the doubt here – due to the context of the remarks. From a technical perspective it’s very clear that IDNs still face a LOT of challenges – the user experience with using them is far from ideal, though it has improved over the past 10 years. The UASG’s recent paper on web hosting tools underlines this: https://uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular-web-hosting-tools-are-not-... [uasg.tech]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular...> regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ [blacknight.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.blacknight.com/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-...> https://blacknight.blog/ [blacknight.blog]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/blacknight.blog/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV...> Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ [michele.blog]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/michele.blog/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hn...> Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ [ceo.hosting]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/ceo.hosting/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hno...> ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Date: Friday, 2 December 2022 at 16:10 To: Avri <avri@doria.org<mailto:avri@doria.org>>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com<mailto:b_jouris@yahoo.com>> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. I agree. Not the best choice of words in a global context, but probably made sense for where Goran was at the time. But statements like this one can come back to bite the organization in the future. Two examples, the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that). But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs. But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly. IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at both the top and second levels. This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go. At the past GNSO meeting the GNSO agreed to give the IDN ePDP much more time to complete its work which is now in 2 phases. The first phase deals with most of the top-level issues, while the second phase deals with the second level. The Top-Level phase is supposed to come out with an initial report in April, but I am not sure if it will meet that deadline. But even if it does, we are talking about another year for a final report only on phase 1. Phase 2 will not be completed until 2025. So, although the rest of the process is moving forward with SubPro, there is a very real probability that some of the IDN gTLD issues may not be resolved by the time the new gTLD program is kicked off. Statements like this one, however, may cause people to argue that no new round should be launched until all of the IDN issues are resolved and would point to statements like this one from Goran as justification. After all, if the goal is to launch IDN gTLDs in the next round, how can you launch a next round if the IDN issues are not yet resolved? Some food for thought. <image001.png> Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com [jjnsolutions.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/jjnsolutions.com/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV...> From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces@icann.org>> On Behalf Of Avri via CPWG Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 2:40 AM To: Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com<mailto:b_jouris@yahoo.com>> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question +1 avri On Dec 2, 2022 at 10:26 AM, <Bill Jouris via CPWG<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet. This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round. Bill Jouris. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android [go.onelink.me]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=G...> On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com [palage.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/palage.com__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce...> via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 [youtube.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4*20__;JQ!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4BS2op0Fg$>at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Can someone unsubscribe me please? I tried following the steps provided via link below but still am receiving emails (spam) On Mon, 5 Dec 2022 at 12:40, Goran Marby via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Hi all,
Thanks for copying me in to this discussion. We have a webinar planned for Dec 14 where we will present the ODA. Look forward to continue the discussion.
Regards
Goran Marby
*From: *"lists@christopherwilkinson.eu" <lists@christopherwilkinson.eu> *Reply-To: *Christopher Wilkinson <cw@christopherwilkinson.eu> *Date: *Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 10:24 PM *To: *"cpwg@icann.org" <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject: *[Ext] Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question
Good evening :
Our recent discussion of Göran Marby's comment at the IGF gives rise, to my mind, to several considerations.
The GNSO Sub Pro report on new gTLDs [gnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/f...> (pp 400+, see Annexes I & J) was issued in January 2021, nearly two years ago. It did not respond to the issues raised by the Dissenting Opinions posted. ALAC has also sent to the Board extensive and detailed Advice on behalf of At Large, requiring several changes in the PDP Report's policy recommendations. Neither the Board nor GNSO have replied to or acted upon the ALAC Advice, albeit available on the ICANN website, translated into all our working languages.
Consequently I consider that the proposed ODP procedure is premature. I am sure that when the outstanding requests for amendments and other criticisms of the PDP Report have been taken fully into account, the eventual ODP work would be substantially changed. Meanwhile the announced ODP risks wasting a lot of our time.
Returning to the IGF and Göran's comment, I suggest that the context IS highly relevant, in relation to ICANN's obligations to the international community, in several respects.
The international, global, interest in the DNS is NOT limited to IDNs. But the PDP Report provides minimal extension of protection to geographical names. Specifically for Africa, there are large populations in vast areas who are currently restricted to a single local ccTLD.
In large parts of Asia, *idem*.
The previous Round of new gTLDs was very largely engrossed with additional English language names. That enhanced, and did not attenuate, the English language bias in the DNS. It has also been to a large extent an economic failure.
I have yet to hear any explanation or apology from the then Board Chair or CEO. We are still dealing with the fallout: lack of universal acceptance and concentration of the Registry/Registrar business through vertical integration and the acquisition of otherwise non-viable Registries. This was foreseeable at the time, and not acted upon by GNSO or the Board.
Furthermore, should one wish to achieve the global balance, hinted at by Göran Marby's remarks, one would need significant Applicant Support, not only financial but also technical and human resources. The PDP was having none of this. If applicant support is as limited next time as it was last time, it risks comparable failure. This is also addressed in the ALAC Advice.
Regards
Christopher Wilkinson
On 3 Dec 2022, at 18:39, Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Of course, in the context of “new round enthusiasts” trying to motivate others, and using the prospect of IDNs to do so, it’s also understandable and carries with it the risks Jeff outlined.
*From: *CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG < cpwg@icann.org> *Date: *Friday, December 2, 2022 at 1:36 PM *To: *Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com>, Avri < avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> *Cc: *Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question
Sounds like Michele and I are in agreement again this year.....wow, everyone remember 2022 :)
Jeffrey J. Neuman
Founder & CEO
JJN Solutions, LLC
Jeff@JJNSolutions.com
+1.202.549.5079
Http://www.jjnsolutions.com [jjnsolutions.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__Http:/www.jjnsolutions.com__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-...>
------------------------------
*From:* Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> *Sent:* Friday, December 2, 2022 11:59 AM *To:* Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>; Avri <avri@doria.org>; Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> *Cc:* Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question
Context is everything.
In the context of the IGF it makes perfect sense that Goran and other talking heads from ICANN would be pushing the global internet mantra.
I’ve no idea if Goran’s comments were scripted or off the cuff, but I’d give him the benefit of the doubt here – due to the context of the remarks.
From a technical perspective it’s very clear that IDNs still face a LOT of challenges – the user experience with using them is far from ideal, though it has improved over the past 10 years.
The UASG’s recent paper on web hosting tools underlines this:
https://uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular-web-hosting-tools-are-not-... [uasg.tech] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular...>
regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/ [blacknight.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.blacknight.com/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-...>
https://blacknight.blog/ [blacknight.blog] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/blacknight.blog/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV...>
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ [michele.blog] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/michele.blog/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hn...>
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ [ceo.hosting] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/ceo.hosting/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hno...>
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
*From: *CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG < cpwg@icann.org> *Date: *Friday, 2 December 2022 at 16:10 *To: *Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> *Cc: *Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question
*[EXTERNAL EMAIL]* Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources.
I agree. Not the best choice of words in a global context, but probably made sense for where Goran was at the time.
But statements like this one can come back to bite the organization in the future.
Two examples,
the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that). But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs. But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly.
IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at both the top and second levels. This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go. At the past GNSO meeting the GNSO agreed to give the IDN ePDP much more time to complete its work which is now in 2 phases. The first phase deals with most of the top-level issues, while the second phase deals with the second level. The Top-Level phase is supposed to come out with an initial report in April, but I am not sure if it will meet that deadline. But even if it does, we are talking about another year for a final report only on phase 1. Phase 2 will not be completed until 2025.
So, although the rest of the process is moving forward with SubPro, there is a very real probability that some of the IDN gTLD issues may not be resolved by the time the new gTLD program is kicked off.
Statements like this one, however, may cause people to argue that no new round should be launched until all of the IDN issues are resolved and would point to statements like this one from Goran as justification. After all, if the goal is to launch IDN gTLDs in the next round, how can you launch a next round if the IDN issues are not yet resolved?
Some food for thought.
<image001.png>
Jeffrey J. Neuman
Founder & CEO
JJN Solutions, LLC
p: +1.202.549.5079
E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com
http://jjnsolutions.com [jjnsolutions.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/jjnsolutions.com/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV...>
*From:* CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> *On Behalf Of *Avri via CPWG *Sent:* Friday, December 2, 2022 2:40 AM *To:* Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> *Cc:* Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> *Subject:* Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question
+1
avri
On Dec 2, 2022 at 10:26 AM, <Bill Jouris via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org>> wrote:
I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet.
This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round.
Bill Jouris.
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android [go.onelink.me] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=G...>
On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com [palage.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/palage.com__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce...> via CPWG
<cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
Hello All,
This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right."
I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 [youtube.com] <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4*20__;JQ!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4BS2op0Fg$>at 4:34:42)
When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
Michael
"One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives."
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- "The entrance of Your words gives light; It gives understanding to the simple". Psalms 119:130
Jonathan Who are you characterising as a new round enthusiast? Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Date: Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 17:39 To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com>, Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Of course, in the context of “new round enthusiasts” trying to motivate others, and using the prospect of IDNs to do so, it’s also understandable and carries with it the risks Jeff outlined. From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Date: Friday, December 2, 2022 at 1:36 PM To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com>, Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Sounds like Michele and I are in agreement again this year.....wow, everyone remember 2022 :) Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC Jeff@JJNSolutions.com +1.202.549.5079 Http://www.jjnsolutions.com ________________________________ From: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 11:59 AM To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>; Avri <avri@doria.org>; Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Context is everything. In the context of the IGF it makes perfect sense that Goran and other talking heads from ICANN would be pushing the global internet mantra. I’ve no idea if Goran’s comments were scripted or off the cuff, but I’d give him the benefit of the doubt here – due to the context of the remarks.
From a technical perspective it’s very clear that IDNs still face a LOT of challenges – the user experience with using them is far from ideal, though it has improved over the past 10 years.
The UASG’s recent paper on web hosting tools underlines this: https://uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular-web-hosting-tools-are-not-... regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Date: Friday, 2 December 2022 at 16:10 To: Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. I agree. Not the best choice of words in a global context, but probably made sense for where Goran was at the time. But statements like this one can come back to bite the organization in the future. Two examples, the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that). But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs. But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly. IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at both the top and second levels. This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go. At the past GNSO meeting the GNSO agreed to give the IDN ePDP much more time to complete its work which is now in 2 phases. The first phase deals with most of the top-level issues, while the second phase deals with the second level. The Top-Level phase is supposed to come out with an initial report in April, but I am not sure if it will meet that deadline. But even if it does, we are talking about another year for a final report only on phase 1. Phase 2 will not be completed until 2025. So, although the rest of the process is moving forward with SubPro, there is a very real probability that some of the IDN gTLD issues may not be resolved by the time the new gTLD program is kicked off. Statements like this one, however, may cause people to argue that no new round should be launched until all of the IDN issues are resolved and would point to statements like this one from Goran as justification. After all, if the goal is to launch IDN gTLDs in the next round, how can you launch a next round if the IDN issues are not yet resolved? Some food for thought. [cid:image001.png@01D9063E.8A250040] Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Avri via CPWG Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 2:40 AM To: Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question +1 avri On Dec 2, 2022 at 10:26 AM, <Bill Jouris via CPWG<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet. This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round. Bill Jouris. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...> On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4%20> at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Ironically, their numbers are small but their voices loud. ;) Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.InnovatorsNetwork.org<http://www.InnovatorsNetwork.org> Main: +1 (202) 827-7594 Direct: +1 (202) 420-7483 ________________________________ From: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> Sent: Monday, December 5, 2022 7:07:29 AM To: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>; Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>; Avri <avri@doria.org>; Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Jonathan Who are you characterising as a new round enthusiast? Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> Date: Saturday, 3 December 2022 at 17:39 To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com>, Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Of course, in the context of “new round enthusiasts” trying to motivate others, and using the prospect of IDNs to do so, it’s also understandable and carries with it the risks Jeff outlined. From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Date: Friday, December 2, 2022 at 1:36 PM To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com>, Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Sounds like Michele and I are in agreement again this year.....wow, everyone remember 2022 :) Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC Jeff@JJNSolutions.com +1.202.549.5079 Http://www.jjnsolutions.com ________________________________ From: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 11:59 AM To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com>; Avri <avri@doria.org>; Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Context is everything. In the context of the IGF it makes perfect sense that Goran and other talking heads from ICANN would be pushing the global internet mantra. I’ve no idea if Goran’s comments were scripted or off the cuff, but I’d give him the benefit of the doubt here – due to the context of the remarks.
From a technical perspective it’s very clear that IDNs still face a LOT of challenges – the user experience with using them is far from ideal, though it has improved over the past 10 years.
The UASG’s recent paper on web hosting tools underlines this: https://uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular-web-hosting-tools-are-not-... regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Date: Friday, 2 December 2022 at 16:10 To: Avri <avri@doria.org>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. I agree. Not the best choice of words in a global context, but probably made sense for where Goran was at the time. But statements like this one can come back to bite the organization in the future. Two examples, the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that). But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs. But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly. IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at both the top and second levels. This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go. At the past GNSO meeting the GNSO agreed to give the IDN ePDP much more time to complete its work which is now in 2 phases. The first phase deals with most of the top-level issues, while the second phase deals with the second level. The Top-Level phase is supposed to come out with an initial report in April, but I am not sure if it will meet that deadline. But even if it does, we are talking about another year for a final report only on phase 1. Phase 2 will not be completed until 2025. So, although the rest of the process is moving forward with SubPro, there is a very real probability that some of the IDN gTLD issues may not be resolved by the time the new gTLD program is kicked off. Statements like this one, however, may cause people to argue that no new round should be launched until all of the IDN issues are resolved and would point to statements like this one from Goran as justification. After all, if the goal is to launch IDN gTLDs in the next round, how can you launch a next round if the IDN issues are not yet resolved? Some food for thought. [cid:image001.png@01D9063E.8A250040] Jeffrey J. Neuman Founder & CEO JJN Solutions, LLC p: +1.202.549.5079 E: jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com> http://jjnsolutions.com From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of Avri via CPWG Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 2:40 AM To: Bill Jouris <b_jouris@yahoo.com> Cc: Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question +1 avri On Dec 2, 2022 at 10:26 AM, <Bill Jouris via CPWG<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet. This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round. Bill Jouris. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...> On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4%20> at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Jeff said: the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain
preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that). But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs. But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly.
Hrm. We know that the GNSO has the power to compel the Board, but is the opposite true? In the absence of GNSO action can the Board act on its own? (ie, to create a special round of IDN gTLDs)? This could be one of those times where the public interest differs from that of the current domain buyer-seller cartel. The GNSO's lack of consensus does not render this a bad idea. So, Olivier, you say that the ICANN Board is less of a slave to vested interests than in years past ... here's a chance to demonstrate it. Is it capable of reasonably debating the public-interest and readiness issues related to an IDN-only round in the absence of GNSO approval? And then Jonathan said: IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at
both the top and second levels. This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go.
We already have enough IDN TLDs now in the wild to be able to collect useful data on whether or not they are (on the balance) more useful or troublesome in their current state. Without pausing on work to address the challenges, surely there must be a way to determine if an IDN round is worthwhile given the current state of the tech and policy. The current status -- too much is still broken in IDN gTLDs but they're still safe to delegate -- is confusing to say the least. Either they're useful enough to do now (and Goran is correct) or they're not (and Goran is aspirational, and all IDN rollouts need to pause till the bugs are fixed.). - Evan
A generic TLD [domain extension] has an inherent meaning. It has a value outside of that created by the system. A generic TLD is a monopoly on a generic term. As an example, there are many hotels but only gets .hotel. Here the word hotel is a simply a word in the English language. IMHO, how is this avoided in a multi-registrar & single registry system needs more transparency than is found now. I surmise that money matters and so do the choice of IDNs. [EPDP on IDNs is with Mr. Satish Babu et al.] Sincerely, Gopal T V 0 9840121302 https://vidwan.inflibnet.ac.in/profile/57545 https://www.facebook.com/gopal.tadepalli ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dr. T V Gopal Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering College of Engineering Anna University Chennai - 600 025, INDIA Ph : (Off) 22351723 Extn. 3340 (Res) 24454753 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ________________________________ From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Evan Leibovitch via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> Sent: 07 December 2022 10:42 To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com> Cc: Avri <avri@doria.org>; Cpwg <cpwg@icann.org> Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question Jeff said: the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that). But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs. But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly. Hrm. We know that the GNSO has the power to compel the Board, but is the opposite true? In the absence of GNSO action can the Board act on its own? (ie, to create a special round of IDN gTLDs)? This could be one of those times where the public interest differs from that of the current domain buyer-seller cartel. The GNSO's lack of consensus does not render this a bad idea. So, Olivier, you say that the ICANN Board is less of a slave to vested interests than in years past ... here's a chance to demonstrate it. Is it capable of reasonably debating the public-interest and readiness issues related to an IDN-only round in the absence of GNSO approval? And then Jonathan said: IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at both the top and second levels. This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go. We already have enough IDN TLDs now in the wild to be able to collect useful data on whether or not they are (on the balance) more useful or troublesome in their current state. Without pausing on work to address the challenges, surely there must be a way to determine if an IDN round is worthwhile given the current state of the tech and policy. The current status -- too much is still broken in IDN gTLDs but they're still safe to delegate -- is confusing to say the least. Either they're useful enough to do now (and Goran is correct) or they're not (and Goran is aspirational, and all IDN rollouts need to pause till the bugs are fixed.). - Evan
The question is what is the purpose of new gTLDs, whether it is important to reach out to underserved communities or to do more of the same. For ICANN, it is wise to pretend in fora like IGF that we aim for the former. Contracted parties might have a different opinion, though. What does At-Large think? My 2c Roberto On 02.12.2022, at 08:25, Bill Jouris via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet. This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round. Bill Jouris. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...> On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com<http://palage.com> via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>> wrote: Hello All, This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right." I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 at 4:34:42) When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Michael "One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
1+ with Bill. We should work on the Next Generation of top-level domains only for removing the border to exchange voice in an internet space that supports our businesses and community and respect the culture. Regards / Md. Jahangir Hossain Member, Board of Trustees Internet Society Bangladesh Dhaka Chapter https://www.linkedin.com/in/jrjahangir/ https://internetsociety.org.bd/ On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 1:25 PM Bill Jouris via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote:
I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs. We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet.
This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round.
Bill Jouris.
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android <https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_Andr...>
On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> wrote: Hello All,
This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right."
I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 at 4:34:42)
When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
Michael
"One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives."
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear Mike, I think that Goran have mentioned in his speech that this *'The Intention'* and he did not refer to any policy as you can see in the joined picture . In addition and in my opinion what Goran mentioned is a request of the majority Non Latin Community members , and not limited to the African community, so reviewing the Sub Pro in order to favor non latin or non english TLD will be a good proposal for At-large or UA team. Friendly regards. Chokri Le jeu. 1 déc. 2022 à 22:18, mike palage.com via CPWG <cpwg@icann.org> a écrit :
Hello All,
This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022. Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right."
I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 at 4:34:42)
When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
Michael
"One more thing. One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time. We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains. The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right. And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about. We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives." _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (16)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Avri -
Bill Jouris -
Chokri Ben Romdhane -
Evan Leibovitch -
gopal -
Goran Marby -
Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi -
Jahangir Hossain -
Jeff Neuman -
Jonathan Zuck -
lists＠christopherwilkinson.eu -
Michele Neylon - Blacknight -
mike palage.com -
Roberto Gaetano -
Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro