- IDN-WG - lists.icann.org

Interim Report IDN ccNSO Policy Development Process
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim Feb. 6, 2013

Feb. 6, 2013

Dear IDN Working Group, A public comment period is now open on IDN ccNSO Policy Development Process (Interim Report). Please indicate if you think there should be an ALAC response to this document. Regarding the Final Report on User Experience related to the activation of IDN variant TLDs, if after the webinar scheduled on 13 February you feel that there should be a response on this issue, please flag it immediately. Best regards, Rinalia Abdul Rahim sent via galaxy tab ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "ICANN At-Large Staff" <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> Date: 6 Feb 2013 07:20 Subject: [ALAC-Announce] FW: ICANN News Alert -- Interim Report IDN ccNSO Policy Development Process To: "alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org" < alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> [http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-05feb13-en.htm ________________________________ Interim Report IDN ccNSO Policy Development Process 5 February 2013 Forum Announcement: Comment Period Opens on Date: 5 February 2013 Categories/Tags: * Top-Level Domains * Policy Processes Purpose (Brief): In the framework of the ccNSO Policy Development Process on IDN ccTLD's the purpose of the Interim Report< http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idn-ccpdp-interim-04feb13-en.pdf> [PDF, 556 KB] is to report on and seek feed-back on feasible recommendations for overall policy for the selection of IDN country code Top Level Domains strings (IDN ccTLD's) and the inclusion of IDN ccTLD managers in the ccNSO. The Interim Report builds on the Final Paper's of IDN ccPDP Working Groups 1 and 2, which have been open for public comment. Public Comment Box Link: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/idn-ccpdp-05feb13-en.htm This message was sent to matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org<mailto: matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org> from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email Marketing by [http://app.icontact.com/images/icontact_tryFree.gif] < http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription < http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=24564788&l=6333&s=BCA3&m=90… > _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org

4 8

Fwd: [ALAC-Announce] FW: ICANN News Alert -- Webinar: Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) Variant: Examining the User Experience Implication of the Active Variant TLDs
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Feb. 3, 2013

Feb. 3, 2013

Dear IDN WG members, I realise that several of you are members of the IDN VIP work. For those who are not, please find below a Webinar which will take place to bring you up to date and allow you to comment on this important work. I remind you that there is currently a public comment period open and I am still awaiting a reply from this WG on whether you believe that the ALAC should submit a comment, and if so, would you please volunteer a pen-holder for the first draft? Closing date for initial comments is 8 February. I will ask Steve Sheng who is the staff member in charge of this public comment, whether we could submit a statement in the reply period due to the fact that the Webinar takes place after the closing time of the initial comment period. https://community.icann.org/x/KwNlAg Kindest regards, Olivier -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [ALAC-Announce] FW: ICANN News Alert -- Webinar: Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) Variant: Examining the User Experience Implication of the Active Variant TLDs Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 18:44:02 -0800 From: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org> To: alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org <alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> From: ICANN News Alert <communications(a)icann.org<mailto:communications@icann.org>> Date: Friday, February 1, 2013 5:18 PM To: Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org>> Subject: ICANN News Alert -- Webinar: Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) Variant: Examining the User Experience Implication of the Active Variant TLDs [http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-01feb13-en.htm ________________________________ Webinar: Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) Variant: Examining the User Experience Implication of the Active Variant TLDs 1 February 2013 Date: 13 February 2013 Time: 13:00 – 14:50 UTC (5:00am – 6:30am PST) Adobe Connect: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/idnvarianttld/ Dial In: 1-800-550-6865 or 1-213-233-3193 International numbers available here<http://adigo.com/icann/> Meeting ID: 46389 Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) serve as powerful tools for broadening the Internet's capacity and accessibility; however, they also raise novel issues. One important issue concerns "variants" which occur when a single character can be identified with two or more different Unicode Code Points with graphic representations that may or may not be visually similar. IDN variants contain one or more such characters and therefore, if not handled correctly, might result in user confusion or a poor user experience. In an effort to develop potential solutions for the delegation of IDN variant Top-Level Domains (TLDs), IDN Variant Project Teams, consisting of volunteers, subject matter expert consultants and ICANN staff, have conducted case studies in six scripts, produced an integrated report, and are currently underway to completing three projects investigating potential solutions for IDN Variant TLDs delegation. One of these projects is called the Examining the User Experience Implications of Active Variant TLDs Project (P6). The purpose of the project is to gain an understanding of issues that could arise from activating IDN Variant TLDs and offer recommendations to users to avoid such issues. Examples of user roles that have been identified include registrants, registrars, registry operators, system administrators, network operators, application developers, and end users. Project team has published for public comment the Draft Final Report for Examining the User Experience Implications of Active Variant TLDs<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/variant-ux-18jan13-en.htm> and is seeking to establish a dialog with the community to refine proposed principles, impacts and recommendations of the study. This webinar is offered to complement that process both by presenting the key concepts and gathering user input. The IDN Variant TLDs Program team is looking forward to your participation. This message was sent to matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org> from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email Marketing by [http://app.icontact.com/images/icontact_tryFree.gif] <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription <http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=24564788&l=6333&s=BCA3&m=90…> _______________________________________________ ALAC-Announce mailing list ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org

1 0

Fwd: [technical-issues] TechDay ICANN Beijing Call for Presentations
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Jan. 15, 2013

Jan. 15, 2013

FYI -- if IDN mail is treated, this might be interesting to you. Kind regards, Olivier -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [technical-issues] TechDay ICANN Beijing Call for Presentations Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 21:14:35 +0200 From: Dr Eberhard W Lisse <el(a)lisse.NA> To: ccNSO Members <ccnso-members(a)icann.org> CC: zahid(a)jamilandjamil.com, bart.boswinkel(a)icann.org, "africann(a)afrinic.net" <africann(a)afrinic.net>, technical-issues(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org, cctldcommunity(a)cctld-managers.org, "ccnso-techwg(a)icann.org" <ccnso-techwg(a)icann.org> The ccNSO TechWg will again hold the TechDay on Monday of the meeting. Please submit ideas for presentations to the list addresses where this message appears or to any of the following email addresses: el(a)lisse.na ondrej.filip(a)nic.cz In the past it has been suggested to include IDN Mail as a topic. So if someone has something in this regards, please feel free to approach. Please forward this to gNSO and other lists as well :-)-O el -- Dr. Eberhard W. Lisse \ / Managing Member, Omadhina (cc) accounts(a)omadhina.co.NA / * | Telephone: +264 81 124 6733 (cell) PO Box 98256 \ /Please do NOT send e-mail to el(a)lisse.NA Windhoek Namibia ;____/ if it is in ANY way DNS/Omadhina related

1 0

ALAC Statement on the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone - Second Public Comment Draft
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim Jan. 8, 2013

Jan. 8, 2013

Dear ALAC and IDN WG, Edmon and I have prepared a draft statement in response to: At-Large IDN Variant TLD Program – Procedure to Develop <https://community.icann.org/x/7YxEAg>and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels – Second Public Comment Draft Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/7YxEAg> ? Please provide your comments on the wiki so that all input are captured in one place. The link above will take you to the wiki as well as this one - https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=38046957. Text pasted below for your information. Best regards, Rinalia DRAFT 8 Jan 2013 *ALAC Statement on the IDN Variant TLD Program – Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels – Second Public Comment Draft* *Acknowledgment of Project 2.1 Team Achievement*** The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the IDN Variant TLD Program Project 2.1 Team for its efforts and contributions in establishing vital procedures that will enable the delegation and management of IDN Variant TLDs toward enhancing multilingualism and cultural diversity on the Internet. We appreciate the Project Team’s openness to input and we are pleased to see the incorporation of some of our suggestions in the revised “Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels.”** *The 2-Panel Process and Effective Outreach* * * We reiterate our support for the 2-panel process in the development of the Label Generation Rules for the root zone, which allows different IDN language and script communities to form and move at their own pace in implementing IDN Variant TLDs. For effective outreach to various language and script communities that may be interested in forming Generation Panels, we call on ICANN to ensure that all announcements and reports related to the implementation of IDN Variant TLD be published in multiple languages, particularly the languages addressed by the Variant Case Studies and the ones recommended for prioritization in the Procedure Document.** *Limited Supply of Global Experts for the Integration Panel* * * We note with concern that the supply of experts for the Integration Panel is limited. This limitation is problematic for the following reasons: (a) It makes it challenging to ensure diverse cultural backgrounds among the panel members; (b) It places the continuity of the Label Generation Rules process at risk where communities that enter the process late may be affected adversely; (c) It allows for the possibility of process capture by a few experts. We urge ICANN to ensure the sustainability of the Label Generation Rules process for the global language and script communities, who are at different levels of readiness to develop Label Generation Rules for their specific script, writing system and language. We recommend that ICANN undertake strategies to secure a steady supply of expertise (which may include the provision of appropriate incentives as well as capacity building) while placing appropriate term limits that safeguard the process against capture. *Governance Oversight and the Public Comments Process* * * We recognize that the Integration Panel requires independence to carry out its task. We wish to stress that this independence needs to be accompanied with high standards of transparency and strong accountability measures. The Procedure Document specifies the ICANN Public Comments as the primary governance oversight mechanism for the decisions of the Integration Panel. This mechanism has certain weaknesses: (1) It has no review process; (2) It does not include an appeal process for the decisions of the Integration Panel; and (3) The challenges associated with the Public Comments process still apply (e.g., participation of relevant stakeholders, sufficient comment period, etc.). It is imperative that ICANN address the weaknesses of the proposed mechanism to support a transparent and accountable process of developing Label Generation Rules for the root. The Procedure Document points out the following: “There is an argument that could be made that the population of the root LGR is making policy. In which case, the current policy-making procedures in the ccNSO and gNSO could be used.” Unless there is a compelling reason as to why the Label Generation Rules process should be independent of the oversight mechanisms of the ICANN Supporting Organizations (SOs), the ALAC advises the ICANN Board to authorize the respective SOs (i.e., GNSO and ccNSO) to oversee the implementation of the proposed mechanism. The appropriate governance oversight measures should include periodic reviews, high standards of transparency and accountability structures worthy of the ICANN bottom-up multi-stakeholder model. Furthermore, special emphasis on the effective engagement and participation of affected linguistic communities would be crucial throughout the LGR process. *Enabling Policies* Given the prioritization of IDNs in the new gTLD process, the ALAC strongly advises the ICANN board and community to begin addressing the policies required to render the procedures for IDN Variant TLD delegation operational on an urgent basis. Statistics from the Interim Report of the IDN Program Project 6 on User Experience highlights that almost 20% of user queries could be directed towards an IDN Variant TLD. This means that without the delegation of the IDN Variant TLD, almost 20% of users would have a negative experience. Without having the requisite enabling policies in place to support the roll out of the new gTLDs, the prioritization of IDNs would in fact significantly hurt consumer trust and serve as a disservice to the IDN community. *Communicating Convergence Effectively* The Procedure Document indicates that, “the mechanism is not the last stage in making determinations about IDN labels for the root. Rather, its output is to be consumed by other ICANN procedures that actually determine whether a particular label is allocated to someone, and whether it is delegated in the root.” We request that ICANN clarify how the various procedures and processes interface, interact or converge against an estimated timeline for the benefit of the community. END

2 1

Urgent - ALAC consideration of governance oversight and review mechanism for IDNA Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim Dec. 18, 2012

Dec. 18, 2012

Dear ALAC, The IDN Working Group is currently working on a draft ALAC statement in response to the Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels – Second Public Comment Draft<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/idn/draft-lgr-procedure-07dec12-en.pdf> [PDF, 790 KB]. There is one critical aspect of this document that I believe merits an urgent ALAC discussion prior to the finalization of the statement: *The only governance oversight for the decisions of the Integration (Expert) Panel is **the ICANN Public Comments and there is no alternative formal review/appeal mechanism*. There appears to be a resistance to alternative forms of governance oversight. This resistance is premised on a position that the Integrated Panel of experts needs to be independent because what is at stake is the security and stability of the root, which affect all Internet users. The ALAC needs to consider whether there should be alternative governance and policy oversight as well as periodic review of the process as per other key aspects of ICANN work. In considering alternative options, the ALAC should consider both the advantages as well as the risks involved. I have requested Edmon Chung as the At-Large IDN Policy Liaison to lead this discussion at the ALAC level. The deadline for submitting a statement in response to the document is Jan 6, 2013. Given the upcoming holiday period and the need to address this critical matter satisfactorily, urgency is recommended. Below I have pasted what I consider to be relevant extracts from the document to help inform the discussion - I apologize for the length - the actual document is about 70 pages long. I highly recommend that ALAC members read the full document for a more comprehensive view. Best regards, Rinalia Abdul Rahim * Extracts related to the Public Comments Process as governance oversight mechanism* (bold emphasis is mine) "Submitting proposals: The generation panel, when it has completed its work, sends its proposals to the integration panel. At the same time, the generation panel’s proposals are posted for public comment using the ICANN public comment procedures then prevailing. This permits those who did not participate in the generation panel in question to make their views known to the integration panel. A well-functioning public comment procedure is a critical component of this procedure, because there is no formal appeal mechanism. If ICANN’s public comment procedures do not attract attention to the proposals, the procedure is at serious risk of capture by those who do take an interest." "A rejection of a proposal (by the Integration Panel) must be accompanied by a justification citing the specific issues with the proposal that gave rise to the rejection. The justification must include an accounting of which (if any) of the Principles the proposal violates according to the integration panel, as well as every other justification the integration panel has for its decision. Every rejection by the integration panel must be available on the Internet; a web-accessible archive of the decisions is sufficient to meet this requirement." "Decisions by the integration panel are required to be unanimous; any proposal that does not attract unanimous acceptance is automatically not accepted, on the grounds that any proposal that does not attract unanimous support within the integration panel (assuming that panel is doing its job) must be violating one or more of the Principles. The integration panel must take into account any public comments submitted in response to the posting of the generation panel’s output. The integration panel must also publish its decisions and rationales for public comment, and must explicitly take all public comments into account, and publish a report on this review (see B.4.5). Public comment is the only mechanism, short of dismissal of some (or every) integration panel member, by which the integration panel can be held accountable." "Since the integration panel is required to make its determination unanimously, a single objector in disagreement with the rest of the integration panel will prevent the integration panel from accepting a generation panel’s proposal. In case of such disagreement, the integration panel’s reasons for rejection should include an indication that the panel is divided, must include the reasoning behind the objection, and should include details of any disagreement within the panel." "Decision of the integration panel is atomic: The integration panel’s evaluation of a given generation panel’s output is atomic: either it accepts a proposal completely, or it rejects it completely. That is, the integration panel is free to reject a generation panel’s recommendations, but it is not free to amend the details of the generation panel’s proposal. It may, however, return a generation panel’s proposal with a suggestion about what would change the opinion of the integration panel. Most importantly, the integration panel is required to provide detailed reasoning for its rejection in every case. The integration panel’s decision is public; it cannot be appealed, but the generation panel is free to submit the proposal again (altered or unaltered)." *One exceptional review by ICANN Board specified in the document* "Panels, Conservatism, and the Limits of Knowledge: In all matters the integration panel’s judgment is to be governed by the Conservatism and Stability Principles. If the integration panel delivers a repertoire while there is still work to be done on other parts of Unicode, as is inevitable, we expect subsequent iterations of the repertoire. We expect those iterations to increase the size of the repertoire, and not to remove any code point or change any code point variant rules to reflect the new inclusions. *If an iteration of the process causes a subsequent repertoire to remove a code point that was in an earlier repertoire or to change an existing variant rule, all operation of the procedure must halt. A review of the process must ensue to determine whether it is effective at following the principles outlined in Section A.3, and whether it is possible (and how) to add additional checks to the procedure to avoid recurrence of similar failures. Because it is impossible to state in advance what the failure might be (since if we knew, we could write rules to avoid it), the ICANN Board will determine the nature and scope of the review, and will appoint the reviewers.* If such halts are called frequently, that is a reason to believe that this procedure does not work, in which case a new (likely more conservative) procedure will be needed. One effect of the overarching Conservatism Principle should be that these events will not happen frequently; but given the procedure’s reliance on human judgment, it may be necessary to tolerate errors from time to time." * **Overview of Two Pass Process involving Generation Panel and Integration Panel *Process for developing IDN TLD variant label generation rules consists of two passes. "The first pass creates a set of label generation rules specific to a given script, writing system, language, or all of these; this task is carried out by Rule Generation Panels composed of people with deep experience or interest in the script, writing system or language used by some community of Internet users - Generation Panel. These panels will submit their proposals for the LGR to an ICANN TLD IDN Label Generation Rule Integration Panel consisting of independent experts in DNS, Unicode and scripts that has responsibility for the second pass. This second pass involves integrating the proposals into a single unified LGR for the root zone, taking into account the need for a secure, stable and reliable DNS root zone. These two kinds of panels are assisted by advisors, who observe the activities of any or all active panels; who provide comment and advice on the topics of IDNA, Unicode, DNS, linguistics, ICANN policy and process, or other matters; but who do not otherwise have a formal role in making a decision..." * Composition of Integration Panel* (bold emphasis is mine to illustrate controls that should be in place to govern conduct of Panel members) "The integration panel, whether made of consultants, staff, or both, should consist entirely of experts selected by ICANN on the basis of established expertise. *The experts are to be duly qualified against ethical conflicts, in order to minimize the possibility, or any appearance, that the interested parties might capture the process. Experts are to be in a contractual relation with ICANN, so that ICANN may require, as part of its contract with the panelists, impartial and unbiased evaluation.* The panel requires at least one expert in Unicode issues, at least one expert in IDNA and DNS issues (or one for each), and at least one expert in linguistics and writing systems (who could be the same as the first expert, but need not and often will not be). It is worth emphasizing that the supply of actual general experts in any of the relevant areas of expertise is extremely limited. This represents a potential risk to the procedure. The integration panel is a technical working panel, not a representative or deliberative body. It should be kept small in the interest of efficiency, but should not contain fewer then three members at any time. The integration panel is expected to make extensive use of advisors to aid their deliberations. No current or past member of any generation panel may be a member of the integration panel, because the integration panel is responsible for reviewing output from the generation panels." *Label generation rule integration procedure* (bold emphasis is mine) "The integration panel reviews the output of every generation panel from which a proposal is available at the time the integration panel begins review. The integration panel evaluates each proposal. The integration panel first confirms that the proposal stays within the maximal set of code points for the root zone defined by the integration panel, and that it conforms to the other requirements for output set forth in this document. It then evaluates the proposal for consistency with the Principles and for the risk it presents, in the context of the maximal set of Unicode code points for the root zone.* Proposals that do not meet the principles or create, in the judgment of the integration panel, unacceptable systemic risk are rejected.* A generation panel's proposal may be to permanently exclude a code point, which would factor in this evaluation. The integration panel further ensures all proposals together form an internally coherent set of label generation rules, and rejects any proposals that are in conflict. It is at this stage that the integration panel reviews the whole-label evaluation rules, both in the context of the given generation panel proposal, as well as in the context of all such proposals. Based on the Simplicity and Predictability Principles, the integration panel ensures that structurally comparable writing systems have consistent whole-label evaluation rules. Finally, it reviews whether the proposals collectively meet any other requirements (e.g. symmetry) set forth in this document. Proposals that fail this review will be rejected. A rejection of a proposal must be accompanied by a justification citing the specific issues with the proposal that gave rise to the rejection. The justification must include an accounting of which (if any) of the Principles the proposal violates according to the integration panel, as well as every other justification the integration panel has for its decision. Every rejection by the integration panel must be available on the Internet; a web-accessible archive of the decisions is sufficient to meet this requirement. Unlike the generation panels, the integration panel will consider possible interactions with Unicode characters outside the proposed set of rules and, if necessary, reject the generation panel's proposal based on such issues. The integration panel includes in its evaluation possible sets of rules that are not yet proposed, as might happen when a writing system did not initially attract a generation panel but might be expected to attract one in future. Decisions by the integration panel are required to be unanimous; any proposal that does not attract unanimous acceptance is automatically not accepted, on the grounds that any proposal that does not attract unanimous support within the integration panel (assuming that panel is doing its job) must be violating one or more of the Principles. The integration panel must take into account any public comments submitted in response to the posting of the generation panel’s output. The integration panel must also publish its decisions and rationales for public comment, and must explicitly take all public comments into account, and publish a report on this review (see B.4.5). Public comment is the only mechanism, short of dismissal of some (or every) integration panel member, by which the integration panel can be held accountable. While there may be a “first mover advantage” to the establishment of generation panels, the order in which the integration panel would evaluate proposals would be based roughly on the order in which the generation panels produce their proposals, and in any case constrained by the need to evaluate all proposals in context of each other, and compared to the rest of the basic constrained repertoire. Since the integration panel is required to make its determination unanimously, a single objector in disagreement with the rest of the integration panel will prevent the integration panel from accepting a generation panel’s proposal. In case of such disagreement, the integration panel’s reasons for rejection should include an indication that the panel is divided, must include the reasoning behind the objection, and should include details of any disagreement within the panel." END

2 2

Fwd: Re: ALAC Statement on the IDN Variant TLD Program Interim Report Examining the User Experience Implications of Active Variant TLDs
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Dec. 17, 2012

Dec. 17, 2012

Dear IDN-WG, FYI - well done! Kind regards, Olivier -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: ALAC Statement on the IDN Variant TLD Program Interim Report Examining the User Experience Implications of Active Variant TLDs Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 14:24:35 -0800 From: Steve Sheng <steve.sheng(a)icann.org> To: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org>, "interim-variant-ux(a)icann.org" <interim-variant-ux(a)icann.org> CC: Olivier Crépin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com> Dear all, On behalf of IDN variant team project 6 on user experience, let me thank ALAC for this substantive comment. Kind regards, Steve From: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>> Date: Thursday, December 13, 2012 4:19 PM To: "interim-variant-ux(a)icann.org <mailto:interim-variant-ux@icann.org>" <interim-variant-ux(a)icann.org <mailto:interim-variant-ux@icann.org>> Cc: Steve Sheng <steve.sheng(a)icann.org <mailto:steve.sheng@icann.org>>, Olivier Crépin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, ICANN At-Large Staff <staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>> Subject: ALAC Statement on the IDN Variant TLD Program Interim Report Examining the User Experience Implications of Active Variant TLDs Dear All, Please find attached the /ALAC Statement on the IDN Variant TLD Program – Interim Report Examining the User Experience Implications of Active Variant TLDs/. On 13 December 2012, Staff confirmed that the online vote resulted in the ALAC endorsing the Statement with 14 votes in favor, 0 votes against, and 0 abstentions. You may review the result independently under: https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=28169ZtpN7yRxSZcxEI5z3vc Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

1 0

IDN Variant TLD Program Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels Second Public Comment Draft
by Matt Ashtiani Dec. 14, 2012

Dec. 14, 2012

Dear Edmon, Please note that a new PC regarding IDN Variants has been opened. Can you please advise if you will be writing a Statement on the At-Large IDN Variant TLD Program – Procedure to Develop <https://community.icann.org/x/7YxEAg> and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels – Second Public Comment Draft Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/7YxEAg>? If so, when do you intend to submit it? Regards, Matt Ashtiani Policy Specialist ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA

3 3

IDN Variant TLD Program Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels
by Matt Ashtiani Dec. 3, 2012

Dec. 3, 2012

Dear Edmon, Can you please confirm if the IDN WG will be submitting a Statement on the IDN Variant TLD Program – Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels<https://community.icann.org/x/I5AoAg>? Please note that the reply close for this Statement is 9-Nov-2012. As such we would need a Statement as soon as possible. Regards, Matt Ashtiani At-Large Coordination Officer ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA

4 7

ALAC Response to IDN Variant TLD Program - Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim Nov. 14, 2012

Nov. 14, 2012

Dear members of the ALAC, At-Large and IDN WG, * Re: Label Generation Rules (LGR) Process document (Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels)* A draft response to the document specified above has been prepared and posted at the following At-Large Policy Development wiki page for your review and comments: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=36212771 PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU COMMENT BY END OF MONDAY 19 NOVEMBER 2012! The ALAC will vote on the response immediately after the 19th so that the IDN Program Team can take it into consideration as they are finalizing the document based on comments received at the end of the month. Note: Though the comment period is over, we are able to channel this response directly to the VIP Program Team based on an agreement in Toronto. Thank you. Best regards, Rinalia ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: ICANN News Alert <communications(a)icann.org> Date: Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:42 AM Subject: ICANN News Alert -- IDN Variant TLD Program - Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels To: rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com ICANN News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-24sep12-en.htm ____________________________________ IDN Variant TLD Program – Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels 24 September 2012 Comment Period Opens on 24 September 2012 Categories/Tags: Top-Level Domains Purpose (Brief): The Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) Variant TLD Program deals with the variant form of top-level domain (TLD) names in different scripts. To enable IDN Variant TLDs in the root, it is necessary to establish the Label Generation Rules (LGR) for the DNS Root Zone. The Label Generation Rules Process is a way to develop and maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in respect of IDNA labels. The process must be in place to enable the delegation and management of IDN Variant TLDs. The Label Generation Rules (LGR) Process project team, consisting of global volunteers with expert consultants and ICANN staff, has produced the first public draft of the LGR Process document. The team now seeks community input on the proposed process and the principles that support it. The Label Generation Rules (LGR) Process document will be discussed at a public session at the ICANN meeting in Toronto in October 2012. The session schedule will be available at ICANN Toronto Meeting Website ( http://toronto45.icann.org/full-schedule) Comments received in this Public Comment period as well as community feedback during the Toronto meeting will be incorporated into the final draft and published for second round of Public Comment in November 2012. Public Comment Box Link: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/lgr-procedure-24sep12-en.htm ____________________________________ This message was sent to rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Manage Your Subscription: http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=20657474&l=6333&s=R4TD&m=89…

1 0

Fwd: ICANN News Alert -- IDN Variant TLD Program - Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim Nov. 13, 2012

Nov. 13, 2012

Dear IDN Working Group, The forwarded mail is for your information. We have several opportunities to comment on the document on IDN Variant TLD Program (Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels): 1. Via the current public comments process. 2. In Toronto during the session focused on the document. 3. Via the second public comments process in November. If you have an input for official responses from the ALAC on this topic, please forward your comments to this working group list. Note: Edmon and I will provide you with an update on IDN matters at the IDN WG meeting in Toronto, which is scheduled for Wednesday October 17 (4.30pm-6:00pm local Canadian time) - please check the ICANN Toronto Public Meeting schedule, which is published at http://toronto45.icann.org/full-schedule. Best regards, Rinalia ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: ICANN News Alert <communications(a)icann.org> Date: Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:42 AM Subject: ICANN News Alert -- IDN Variant TLD Program - Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels To: rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com ICANN News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-3-24sep12-en.htm ____________________________________ IDN Variant TLD Program – Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels 24 September 2012 Comment Period Opens on 24 September 2012 Categories/Tags: Top-Level Domains Purpose (Brief): The Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) Variant TLD Program deals with the variant form of top-level domain (TLD) names in different scripts. To enable IDN Variant TLDs in the root, it is necessary to establish the Label Generation Rules (LGR) for the DNS Root Zone. The Label Generation Rules Process is a way to develop and maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in respect of IDNA labels. The process must be in place to enable the delegation and management of IDN Variant TLDs. The Label Generation Rules (LGR) Process project team, consisting of global volunteers with expert consultants and ICANN staff, has produced the first public draft of the LGR Process document. The team now seeks community input on the proposed process and the principles that support it. The Label Generation Rules (LGR) Process document will be discussed at a public session at the ICANN meeting in Toronto in October 2012. The session schedule will be available at ICANN Toronto Meeting Website ( http://toronto45.icann.org/full-schedule) Comments received in this Public Comment period as well as community feedback during the Toronto meeting will be incorporated into the final draft and published for second round of Public Comment in November 2012. Public Comment Box Link: http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/lgr-procedure-24sep12-en.htm ____________________________________ This message was sent to rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Manage Your Subscription: http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=20657474&l=6333&s=R4TD&m=89…

4 5