FW: Input to CWG-Stewardship
Forwarding on behalf of Richard Hill. On 4/17/15, 2:14 PM, "Richard Hill" <rhill@hill-a.ch> wrote:
Dear ICG,
Please forward this to the CWG-Stewardship.
I see that a fact sheet on the gTLD ".int" has been submitted to the CWG-Stewardship, see:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/2015-April/002724.html
As a complement to that fact sheet, I would like to point out that the ITU-T has adopted a Recommendation on ".int", E.910, available at:
http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-E.910-200512-I/en
That Recommendation was developed following an open consultation and it reflects the requirements expressed by UN agencies and other international treaty organizations.
Best, Richard
Hi, Thanks for forwarding this on. Is E.910 normative for IANA? or is it aspirational? thanks avri On 20-Apr-15 11:41, Grace Abuhamad wrote:
Forwarding on behalf of Richard Hill.
On 4/17/15, 2:14 PM, "Richard Hill" <rhill@hill-a.ch> wrote:
Dear ICG,
Please forward this to the CWG-Stewardship.
I see that a fact sheet on the gTLD ".int" has been submitted to the CWG-Stewardship, see:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/2015-April/002724.html
As a complement to that fact sheet, I would like to point out that the ITU-T has adopted a Recommendation on ".int", E.910, available at:
http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-E.910-200512-I/en
That Recommendation was developed following an open consultation and it reflects the requirements expressed by UN agencies and other international treaty organizations.
Best, Richard
_______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
hi, I had not seen it either. But did not want to assume. I keep discovering new depth, which i did not know of before, in the IANA conundrum. avri On 20-Apr-15 14:27, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 02:24:17PM -0400, Avri Doria wrote:
Is E.910 normative for IANA? or is it aspirational? It is not referred to anywhere on the IANA int pages, as far as I can see.
Best regards,
A
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
Avri Doria writes:
hi,
I had not seen it either. But did not want to assume. I keep discovering new depth, which i did not know of before, in the IANA conundrum.
I've seen this before. Note IANA is nowehere mentioned. The authors don't don't really seem to understand a lot about the DNS. As far as I know, it was ignored by the community. jaap
Hi, True. IANA is not even listed in the Abbreviations. I guess it is aspirational. Or at least was in 2005. avri On 20-Apr-15 14:57, Jaap Akkerhuis wrote:
Avri Doria writes:
hi,
I had not seen it either. But did not want to assume. I keep discovering new depth, which i did not know of before, in the IANA conundrum.
I've seen this before. Note IANA is nowehere mentioned. The authors don't don't really seem to understand a lot about the DNS. As far as I know, it was ignored by the community.
jaap _______________________________________________ CWG-Stewardship mailing list CWG-Stewardship@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com
Hi,
I guess it is aspirational.
Well, it might have been the aspiration of folks who attended the E.int (later E.910) ITU meetings in Geneva (which did not include ICANN staff to my knowledge I was general manager of IANA at that time so I probably would've known). That was a long time ago and many things have changed. I personally don't think it should have any bearing on how .INT is dealt with post-transition. Regards, -drc
participants (5)
-
Andrew Sullivan -
Avri Doria -
David Conrad -
Grace Abuhamad -
Jaap Akkerhuis