February 2008 - EURO-Discuss

[Fwd: Re: [ALAC-Internal] Proposed ALAC-statement regarding JPA]
by Jacqueline A.Morris Feb. 14, 2008

Feb. 14, 2008

Dear All, Please see the draft below of a proposed At Large statement on the JPA. Time is short - the deadline is tomorrow, but as much participation as possible is the At Large way, so please do what you can re comments. Jacqueline >> Annette Muehlberg wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> i think by replacing the last paragraph we could, wihtout dismissing other >> positions, reach a consensus. please have a look at the last alternative >> paragraph. >> >> warm greetings >> >> annette >> >> >> >> >> >> Proposed ALAC-statement regarding JPA: >> >> As the JPA (between the US Government and ICANN) is under Review, ALAC >> wishes to underline the unique opportunity the occasion offers to realize >> the original goals that led to the formation of ICANN. These include, inter >> alia, acknowledgement of the international nature of ICANN, support of the >> multi-stakeholder bottom-up approach to the management of ICANN, and the >> provision of viable and stable channels for the involvement of individual >> Internet users in the ICANN policy formation process. Measures must be >> implemented to ensure non-discriminatory availability of ICANN/IANA services >> as well as the opportunity for the involvement of global individual users in >> the ICANN process. >> >> In its role as the voice of the individual Internet users, ALAC firmly >> believes that the current multi-stakeholder framework at ICANN should be >> further strengthened to allow more proactive involvement of end-users. The >> process to full participation of individual users through the ALAC/RALO >> (Regional At-Large Organization) mechanism is being undertaken at this >> moment. There is, however, a lack of incentives for the participants, >> especially a lack of direct involvement at the decision-making levels of >> ICANN. Therefore, we think that ICANN should find ways to implement adequate >> representation of individual users at the decision-making levels of ICANN so >> that a real multi-stakeholder framework is achieved. >> >> In addition, we believe that no government should have a pre-eminent role in >> DNS management and exercise power over database changes and root-server >> data. We suggest that an institutional form should be found as soon as >> possible so that ICANN does not lie under the authority of any single >> national legislation. We also strongly advocate transparency and openness in >> the process of making any structural change in the ICANN framework for the >> coming transition. >> >> However, at this mid-term review phase, we do not believe the organization >> is ready to function without a similar accountability mechanism to the JPA >> in place. >> >> >> Alternative replacing the last paragraph: >> >> We are concerned that the successor oversight framework is still not clear >> and ICANN needs to clarify the transitional arrangements with regard to >> accountability and transparency as well as to allow further definition and >> evolution of the multi-stakeholder model of governance under which it >> operates. >> >> >> > > >

3 2

Fw: [ALAC-Internal] WebWatch statement on the Joint ProjectAgreement
by Annette Muehlberg Feb. 14, 2008

Feb. 14, 2008

hi all, I just pointed out to the ALAC that we still should point out that we do suggest that an institutional form should be found as soon as possible so that ICANN does not lie under the authority of any single national legislation. But, that at this mid-term review phase, we do not believe the organization is ready to function without a similar accountability mechanism to the JPA in place. I think, if we add the last sentence to the document I sent in to the ntia two years ago in the name of the alac and make some minor changes we could reach a consensus paper to send out today. best annette please have a look at our former statement: From: Annette Muehlberg To: <DNSTransition(a)ntia.doc.gov> Date: Thu, Jul 6, 2006 12:20 PM Subject: ALAC Comments to NTIA Consultation on Transition of DNS Management 6 July 2006 Fiona Alexander Office of International Affairs National Telecommunications and Information Administration 1401 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Room 4701 Washington, DC 20230 Dear Ms. Alexander, The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) of the Internet Corporation for Assigned The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), mandated by ICANN bylaws to convey the interests of global individual users, respectfully submits the following comments regarding the transition of the technical coordination and management of the Internet domain name and addressing system (Internet DNS). ALAC is a global entity comprised of fifteen appointed members, three from each of five geographic regions: Africa, Asia/Pacific/Australia, Europe, Latin America/Caribbean Islands and North America. In addition, there are more than 40 organizations already accredited as "At-Large Structures (ALS)," which will eventually form Regional At-Large Organizations (RALOs) that will function as a bottom-up mechanism to support and engage in the ICANN policy process. As such, ALAC would like to emphasize the critical importance of openness, inclusion, transparency, and equal opportunity for all stakeholders of the world to share in the affairs of the global Internet identifier systems that ICANN is tasked to coordinate. As the MoU between the US Government and ICANN expires in September this year, ALAC wishes to underline the unique opportunity the occasion offers to realize the original goals that led to the formation of ICANN. These include, inter alia, acknowledgement of the international nature of ICANN, support of the multi-stakeholder bottom-up approach to the management of ICANN, and the provision of viable and stable channels for the involvement of individual Internet users in the ICANN policy formation process. Measures must be implemented to ensure non-discriminatory availability of ICANN/IANA services as well as the opportunity for the involvement of global individual users in the ICANN process. In its role as the voice of the individual Internet users, ALAC firmly believes that the current multi-stakeholder framework at ICANN should be further strengthened to allow more proactive involvement of end-users. The process to full participation of individual users through the ALAC/RALO (Regional At-Large Organization) mechanism is being undertaken at this moment. There is, however, a lack of incentives for the participants, especially a lack of direct involvement at the decision-making levels of ICANN. Therefore, we think that ICANN should find ways to implement adequate representation of individual users at the decision-making levels of ICANN so that a real multi-stakeholder framework is achieved. In addition, we believe that no government should have a pre-eminent role in DNS management and exercise power over database changes and root-server data. We suggest that an institutional form should be found so that ICANN does not lie under the authority of any single national legislation. We also strongly advocate transparency and openness in the process of making any structural change in the ICANN framework for the coming transition. Respectfully submitted, Annette Muehlberg Chair At-Large Advisory Committee Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers

2 1

EURALO Delhi report 3
by Wolf Ludwig Feb. 14, 2008

Feb. 14, 2008

Hi all, Yesterday (Tuesday) morning we had a meeting of the At-Large Regional Secretariats discussing all kinds of pending questions that have been listed in Los Angeles (Nov. 07) and should be solved in the coming months. A focus was improvement of information that ICANN provides to its regional organisations (RALOs) to be passed on to their respective At-Large structures to enhance participation. Immediately afterwards we met some of the board members for an exchange of information and opinions. There had been other interesting cross constituency meetings such as preparation of today’s GNSO Council session and a conference on “IT success of India” with four leading Indian business managers. In the afternoon ALAC met with Robin representing the Non-commercial Users Constituency (NCUC – of the Generic Names Supporting Organization, GNSO) discussing common concerns and exchanging view points. All those who haven’t had enough so far could just follow the rest of the Board meeting with the GAC. The focus of this open meeting was on the midterm review of the JPA and what transition to the private sector will look like for ICANN. The complete schedule for ICANN's 31st meeting, as well as links to webcast sessions and our public participation website, can be found at: http://delhi.icann.org/. So far, Best regards from Delhi, Wolf comunica-ch phone +41 79 204 83 87 www.comunica-ch.net http://blog.allmend.ch - Digitale Allmend

2 1

EURALO Delhi report 4
by Wolf Ludwig Feb. 14, 2008

Feb. 14, 2008

Hi all, Yesterday (Wednesday) morning I participated in the open GNSO Council Meeting trying to get familiar with this body and the variety of subjects of its six constituencies. The debate comprised issues like domain tasting, new gTLDs, IDNs and changes to the GNSO’s structure and the GNSO Improvements report submitted by the Board Governance Committee (BGC) early February 08. In the afternoon I followed Workshops on the IPv6 Update, Translation Policy and the Operating Plan. In the evening ALAC plus Secretariats had cocktails and hors d'oeuvres with members of the GNSO Council. In this report I would like to share a comment of the Consumer Union of the US on ICANN’s Joint Project Agreement (JPA) which is supported by many at ALAC with you: ___ COMMENTS OF CONSUMER REPORTS WEBWATCH, Consumers Union of the U.S., On ICANN Joint Project Agreement with U.S. Commerce Department February 14, 2008 Consumer Reports WebWatch of the Consumers Union, representing 9 million consumers in the United States and Canada, supports ICANN’s efforts to evolve and move forward toward an existence apart from the JPA agreement with the U.S. Department of Commerce. However, at this mid-term review phase, we do not believe the organization is ready to function without a similar accountability mechanism to the JPA in place. Major changes need to occur within the organization to assure more efficient and meaningful user community representation, with long-term guarantees that such representation would endure unforeseen scenarios in the future. Our justifications for this position are simple: First, we do not believe the structure of ICANN as it exists today sufficiently takes into account the needs and opinions of end-users. Based on a review of operational documents and bylaws, we do not see any sort of language guaranteeing meaningful user participation into the future. To address this issue, Consumers Union believes the at-large community needs multiple seats on the ICANN board; the initial bylaws, in fact, called for fully half the board to be elected by the at-large. We base this opinion on Consumer Reports WebWatch’s own 11-month experience as an “at-large structure” recruited by ICANN, and our eight months’ experience as an elected representative to the at-large advisory committee.__Second, though the outreach work of ICANN at-large staff Nick Ashton-Hart and Kieran McCarthy is commendable, ICANN’s staff and public communications budget is insufficient to address a much larger problem of outreach. To elaborate: Currently, the NA-RALO is made up of a scant handful of organizations. While these are valuable partners, in no way could the NA-RALO be characterized as a viable representation of a broad-based user community in the United States and Canada. Further, many consumer organizations in the United States with a mission that includes the intersection of technology and consumer issues, remain skeptical of ICANN's intentions and its viability as an organization that takes consumer views into account. Until something is done to bridge this gap and ICANN demonstrates its good intentions and long-term structural viability to organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse and others, we do not believe ICANN can be considered to be acting in accordance with the concerns of the user community in North America.__In addition, there are no guarantees beyond mention in the bylaws that the "at-large community," itself currently under review, would remain a part of the ICANN structure 20 or even 10 years from now. The at-large advisory committee is without a vote in any meaningful policy forum. Without direct user community representation on the ICANN board, we do not believe ICANN is truly acting as a “multi-stakeholder" organization. We are concerned, in fact, that ICANN does sees itself as a multi-stakeholder organization, with industry, government, and industry groups as the stakeholders. It does not help matters much that many within the ICANN community view domain name registrants as the Internet’s “end-users,” and therefore the farthest realm the ICANN needs to reach. Until these issues are addressed we do not believe the organization is ready to progress beyond the JPA, which refers to "the global participation of all stakeholders" and "mechanisms for involvement of those affected by the ICANN policies." As the Internet-using public is a key set of stakeholders affected by ICANN's policies, it is critical, including for Internet security and stability, that the organization be accountable to the public and account effectively for its input. We believe the following three things need to happen in order for ICANN to move forward beyond the JPA: 1. Address lack of meaningful user representation, and assure its long-term viability within the organization, by creating multiple “user community” seats on the ICANN board. 2. Allocate significant budget to get the message that it has done so, out to civil society stakeholder groups in North America and the global user community. 3. Take administrative steps to ensure the long-term structural existence of user community presence and participation in decision-making. We appreciate the opportunity to comment. Beau Brendler, Director, Consumer Reports WebWatch, and member, ICANN at-large advisory committee ___ The complete schedule for ICANN's 31st meeting, as well as links to webcast sessions and our public participation website, can be found at: http://delhi.icann.org/. So far, Best regards from Delhi, Wolf comunica-ch phone +41 79 204 83 87 www.comunica-ch.net http://blog.allmend.ch - Digitale Allmend

4 3

Re: [EURO-Discuss] EURALO Delhi report 2
by Wolf Ludwig Feb. 12, 2008

Feb. 12, 2008

Hi, JFC Morfin wrote Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:43: (...) >may I underline that we all are IGF participants. Desai and Kummer >are sort of an SO. By nature, the IGF is heterarchic as is the >Information Society and cannot be represented. This makes ALAC an >interestingly structured IGF participant particularly apt to >represent the ICANN community within the IGF debate. The vote on the >Euro-IGF could be a good opportunity to experiment a kind of special >relations at regional level (cnforming with the Tunis agenda) and to >put the ALAC in its proper place (relations with the external world). Agreed -- as I mentioned before it was meant in an ironical way ... > and I think that the report from this Workshop >>will be available soon. So far, > >This is very interesting. Do you think it be possible to have a >transcript : we are accustomed to Bertrand never writting down his speeches. We will push the ICANN people ;-) best, Wolf comunica-ch phone +41 79 204 83 87 www.comunica-ch.net http://blog.allmend.ch - Digitale Allmend

1 0

EURALO Delhi report 2
by Wolf Ludwig Feb. 12, 2008

Feb. 12, 2008

Hi all, This morning we had the official Opening Ceremony: The New Delhi meeting is the first of the three public ICANN meetings in 2008. Afterwards in the Public Forum - President's Report and Comments: “This year is an important one for the future of ICANN. The U.S. government is in the middle of its Midterm Review of its Joint Project Agreement with ICANN, and we’re arguing it’s time to take the final step to originally envisioned private sector model for ICANN,” said Peter Dengate Thrush, ICANN’s Board Chairman. “In fact the public comment period closes on the final day of this meeting – so we expect plenty of discussion about this in New Delhi, and we will be encouraging everyone who believes in the ICANN model of coordination not control to make their thoughts known.” “There wlll be key discussions at the New Delhi meting about our ongoing work to develop a new application and approval model for new generic top-level domains or gTLDs, and our work on Internationalized Domain Names or IDNs, which will mean the languages and scripts of most of the world could be used to write domain names,” said Dr Paul Twomey, ICANN’s President and CEO. There was a question from Wolfgang (by remote participation) asking for the future of At-Large at ICANN and the Summit which is supposed to happen in June 08 in Paris. The question was repeated by Sébastien. But there was no answer or comment neither from Paul Twomey nor from Peter Dengate Thrush. Whether the planed Summit will happen in Paris is still uncertain and no ICANN representative wanted to expose himself on this question. Public Discussion / JPA Review session Peter Dengate Trush gave a presentation on ICANN’s submission to the US government over the JPA midterm review. ICANN’s view is that the JPA should be concluded. In the afternoon Workshop we had an Update on Internet Governance and the last IGF with Nikin Dessai and Markus Kummer (what seems to be a new step towards peaceful coexistence ;-). The last part of the afternoon programme was a controversial debate on IDN (Progress on the Fast-Track Process for Introduction of a Limited Number of IDN ccTLDs). Discussions around IDNs will include two workshops, one on the Fast-Track Process to find a way to represent territory identifications in local languages as country-code top-level domains as quickly as possible in the areas of highest need, and another on the pioneering work India is doing on IDNs in Indian Languages and Scripts. The complete schedule for ICANN's 31st meeting, as well as links to webcast sessions and our public participation website, can be found at: http://delhi.icann.org/. So far, Best regards from Delhi, Wolf comunica-ch phone +41 79 204 83 87 www.comunica-ch.net http://blog.allmend.ch - Digitale Allmend

3 3

Re: [EURO-Discuss] EURALO Delhi report 2
by JFC Morfin Feb. 12, 2008

Feb. 12, 2008

At 07:51 12/02/2008, Wolf Ludwig wrote: > >1. What specifics you have in mind if you refer to a "new step in > peacful coexistence" with regard to IGF? >Well, it was meant as a somehow ironical remark. If I am not wrong, >it was the first time that two IGF-representatives had a chance to >explain and discuss IGF-matters. Dear Wolf, may I underline that we all are IGF participants. Desai and Kummer are sort of an SO. By nature, the IGF is heterarchic as is the Information Society and cannot be represented. This makes ALAC an interestingly structured IGF participant particularly apt to represent the ICANN community within the IGF debate. The vote on the Euro-IGF could be a good opportunity to experiment a kind of special relations at regional level (cnforming with the Tunis agenda) and to put the ALAC in its proper place (relations with the external world). > >2. What was the practical controversy on the fast track ccTLD.idn > discussion? >There was the initial report (see link >http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/draft-initial-report-idnc-wg-01feb08.p…) >and plenty of public comments until Delhi and yesterday during the >meeting -- what >is difficult to briefly summarise. Bertrand La Chapelle (GAC-France) >made an excellent >and well appreciated statement and I think that the report from this Workshop >will be available soon. So far, This is very interesting. Do you think it be possible to have a transcript : we are accustomed to Bertrand never writting down his speeches. Thank you. jfc >best, Wolf > > >Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote Tue, 12 Feb 2008 05:10: > >Thanks Wolf for doing this. > >Two questions: > > >2. What was the practical controversy on the fast track ccTLD.idn > discussion? > > > >Thanks > > > >wolfgang > > > > > >________________________________ > > > >Von: euro-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org im Auftrag von Wolf Ludwig > >Gesendet: Di 12.02.2008 04:33 > >An: Europe disc at large > >Betreff: [EURO-Discuss] EURALO Delhi report 2 > > > > > > > >Hi all, > > > >This morning we had the official Opening Ceremony: > >The New Delhi meeting is the first of the three public ICANN > meetings in 2008. > > > >Afterwards in the Public Forum - President's Report and Comments: > > "This year is an important one for the future of ICANN. The U.S. > government is in the middle of its Midterm Review of its Joint > Project Agreement with ICANN, and we're arguing it's time to take > the final step to originally envisioned private sector model for > ICANN," said Peter Dengate Thrush, ICANN's Board Chairman. "In fact > the public comment period closes on the final day of this meeting - > so we expect plenty of discussion about this in New Delhi, and we > will be encouraging everyone who believes in the ICANN model of > coordination not control to make their thoughts known." > > > > "There wlll be key discussions at the New Delhi meting about our > ongoing work to develop a new application and approval model for > new generic top-level domains or gTLDs, and our work on > Internationalized Domain Names or IDNs, which will mean the > languages and scripts of most of the world could be used to write > domain names," said Dr Paul Twomey, ICANN's President and CEO. > > > >There was a question from Wolfgang (by remote participation) > asking for the future of At-Large at ICANN and the Summit which is > supposed to happen in June 08 in Paris. The question was repeated > by Sébastien. But there was no answer or comment neither from Paul > Twomey nor from Peter Dengate Thrush. Whether the planed Summit > will happen in Paris is still uncertain and no ICANN representative > wanted to expose himself on this question. > > > >Public Discussion / JPA Review session > >Peter Dengate Trush gave a presentation on ICANN's submission to > the US government over the JPA midterm review. ICANN's view is that > the JPA should be concluded. > > > >In the afternoon Workshop we had an Update on Internet Governance > and the last IGF with Nikin Dessai and Markus Kummer (what seems to > be a new step towards peaceful coexistence ;-). > > > >The last part of the afternoon programme was a controversial > debate on IDN (Progress on the Fast-Track Process for Introduction > of a Limited Number of IDN ccTLDs). Discussions around IDNs will > include two workshops, one on the Fast-Track Process to find a way > to represent territory identifications in local languages as > country-code top-level domains as quickly as possible in the areas > of highest need, and another on the pioneering work India is doing > on IDNs in Indian Languages and Scripts. > > > >The complete schedule for ICANN's 31st meeting, as well as links > to webcast sessions and our public participation website, can be > found at: http://delhi.icann.org/. So far, > > > >Best regards from Delhi, > >Wolf > > > > > > > >comunica-ch > >phone +41 79 204 83 87 > >www.comunica-ch.net > > > >http://blog.allmend.ch <http://blog.allmend.ch/> - > >Digitale Allmend > > > >_______________________________________________ > >EURO-Discuss mailing list > >EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarg > e-lists.icann.org > > > >Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org <http://www.euralo.org/> > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >EURO-Discuss mailing list > >EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarg > e-lists.icann.org > > > >Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org > > > > > >comunica-ch >phone +41 79 204 83 87 >www.comunica-ch.net > >http://blog.allmend.ch - >Digitale Allmend > >_______________________________________________ >EURO-Discuss mailing list >EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.… > >Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org

1 0

Re: [EURO-Discuss] [At-Large] slides on new gtld recommendations
by Annette Muehlberg Feb. 12, 2008

Feb. 12, 2008

Dear Alan, sure, I am happy to forward your message to the regional lists. best Annette ----- Original Message ----- From: Alan Greenberg To: Annette Muehlberg ; At-Large ; Europe disc at large ; lac-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org ; afri-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org ; Asia-Pacific Discuss ; NA Discuss Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 6:45 PM Subject: Re: [At-Large] slides on new gtld recommendations Annette, your citations are taken out of context, and made worse by poor wording on the slide. The heading of the list on slide 12 was "Examples of narrow exceptions under consideration: where to draw the line?". From discussion (transcript is or will be posted), it was clear that this list was a summary of the types of restrictions on free speech found in various national laws. It was clear that this total list was not what ICANN would use to screen gTLDs. Perhaps we may not be happy when we see what ICANN staff finally recommends to the Board, but it is unfair to characterize the list on the slide as such. The title line could have been clearer. Since I am not on all of these LAC, AFRI, APAC and EURO lists, I presume this message will bounce. I would appreciate it if you would forward this to them. Alan At 11/02/2008 08:47 AM, Annette Muehlberg wrote: All, you may want to have a look at these slides. I guess, it will be a challenge to get new gtlds through this maze of restrictions. No "subversive propaganda", criticism of religion, etc. etc. in domain names. here is the staff's plan to implement council's new gtld recommendations http://www.gnso.icann.org/correspondence/presentation-gnso-new-gtlds-09feb0… best greetings annette _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org

1 0

ICANN POLICY UPDATE – 11 February 2008
by Nick Ashton-Hart Feb. 12, 2008

Feb. 12, 2008

Dear All: Attached are brief summaries of a number of Internet policy issues that are being addressed in the ICANN community's bottom-up policy development structure. This update is provided by ICANN's Policy Staff in response to community requests for periodic summaries of ICANN's policy work. Links to additional information are included in the attached document, and we encourage you to go beyond these brief staff summaries and learn more about the ICANN community's work. Our goal is to maximize transparency and broad community participation in ICANN's policy development activities. We continue to investigate more effective and efficient ways to communicate the relevance, importance and status of ongoing issues to the ICANN community. Comments and suggestions on how we can improve these efforts are most welcome and should be sent to policy-staff(a)icann.org. This update will be posted on ICANN's website. Regards, Denise Denise Michel ICANN VP, Policy --------------------------------------------- ICANN POLICY UPDATE – 11 February 2008 CONTENTS: 1. GNSO -- IMPROVEMENTS 2. GNSO -- DOMAIN NAME TASTING 3. GNSO -- WHOIS 4. GNSO -- INTER-REGISTRY TRANSFER POLICY 5. GNSO -- LEADERSHIP/ELECTION 6. MULTIPLE ENTITIES -- IDN ccTLDs 7. CCNSO -- IANA WORKING GROUP 8. CCNSO -- PARTICIPATION WORKING GROUP 9. CCNSO -- WORK PLAN 10. CCNSO -- PHISHING SURVEY 11. SSAC -- REPORTS AND STATEMENTS FOR NEW DELHI 12. AT-LARGE -- APRALO PRIORITIES 13. AT-LARGE -- NEW DELHI POLICY AGENDA 14. AT-LARGE -- PARTICIPATION -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 595 85 44 mobile: +41 (79) 595 54 68 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Consultation on Fast Track IDNs: Initial Draft Report of IDNC Working Group
by Nick Ashton-Hart Feb. 11, 2008

Feb. 11, 2008

Dear All: As promised, there are now versions of the IDNc Initial Draft Report, and accompanying consultation announcements, in seven languages online. Please do forward on to those in the various language communities - remember to do it fast as the consultation closes on 26th February 2008: Public Comments Requested on Initial Draft Fast-Track Mechanism for Introduction of a Limited Number of IDN ccTLDs يُرجى إرسال التعليقات العامة على آلية المسودة المبدئي للتتبع السريع لتقديم عدد محدود من IDN ccTLD 在快速跟踪机制下引入有限数量 IDN ccTLD 的初稿，现公开征求意见 IDN ccTLDs की सीमित संख्या के परिचय के लिए प्रारंभिक ड्राफ़्ट फ़ास्ट-ट्रैक प्रणाली पर अनुरोध की गई सार्वजनिक टिप्पणियाँ 한정된 수의 IDN ccTLD 채택 추진 가속화 방안 초안에 대 한 공개 의견 수렴 ファーストトラックメカニズムに基づく限定数の IDN ccTLD の導入に関する最初のドラフトについて一般からのコメントを募集 Общественные комментарии к первоначальному черновому проекту ускоренного метода для введения ограниченного числа кодов стран доменов высшего уровня (ccTLD) IDN -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +41 (22) 595 85 44 mobile: +41 (79) 595 54 68 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0