Brett, there are no current submissions listed anywhere in
response to the topics/questions...
The following missive is supplied to you all to hopefully clarify
a few points regarding what the ALAC IDN-WG and the IDNC-WG need as input on
the matters of fast track IDN’s and IDN ccTLDs by who and when, as there
appears to be some minor confusion.
In relation to comments from the Internet User Community
regarding the introduction of IDN’s, there are in fact two parallel areas
ALAC and its IDN-WG are soliciting input for...
1.
And input into the Fast Track proposal issue being worked on by
the IDNC-WG, based upon a set of proposed topics:-currently in draft form,
which will be finalised based on comments *ON this list of topics*,
after the Jan 16th deadline.
2.
The general topic of Introduction of IDN ccTLDs as per http://www.icann.org/public_comment/#idn-cctld-issues
with a 25th Jan deadline.
The points Hong posted to these lists relates specifically to
the first matter and that has the deadline of Jan 16th... they are a Synopsis
or list of issues that the ccNSO-idncctld list is (the IDNC-WG) is wishing to
look at so far... The WG list Hong mentioned and listed below is the one that the
IDNC-WG committee uses and is subscription to nominated Member only...
We do however actively seek
input from the ALAC IDN-WG, and most particularly the RALO’s and their
ALS’s on these topics (note again please, this list constitutes the
majority of topics {if not all of them} expected to be in the final list) so
the At-Large community can use this list as an advance set of topics, upon
which to begin their comments and replies to (and indeed if you have any
additional topics to suggest, now is the time to let Hong and I know, so that
we can forward them to the IDNC-WG before January 16th ...
As Hong stated in her earlier
email it is extremely important that we collect and collate the views of the
At-Large Community regarding these topics, so that these views (even if the
view or response is “we have no comment on this matter”) can be collated
and contributed to the IDNC-WG processes... These processes include the
preparation by end of January of an interim report, for the end of January and
use of this list in a proactive manner will indeed facilitate our input on
behalf of the At-Large Community contribute to these processes and be a way of
preparing for our contributions to the Public Comment period on this interim report which includes:- Public
workshop at ICANN meeting in New Delhi and the Meeting IDNC WG at New Delhi
meeting during February... Note please that once the consolidated topics list
is prepared by the committee after January 16th, that will be a
document which we can distribute.
The ALAC IDN-WG Chair and Hong as our IDN Liaison were asked to specifically
look at these topics and it was felt at this month’s ALAC meeting that to
better elicit reply and reaction from the RALOs, ALS,s and the At-Large
Community, in a timely manner (via the representatives Hong and myself into the
IDNC-WG); starting work based upon this draft list of topics was well
worthwhile... n.b. all background information on the ALAC IDN-WG and Liaison
work and reports so far, is found here https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
including the calls for input into the fast track processes issues work of the
IDNC-WG in Hongs December and January Reports to the ALAC) and the ALAC meeting
transcriptions and minutes also cover off our discussions as well...
Fatimata, as the new Chair of the ALAC IDN-WG along with Hong
as liaison will also wish to work on response and formal comment into the
Public comment process (Item 2. above) and it is that which Fatimata referenced
earlier (note the ALAC via its IDN-WG, as well as the RALO’s, ALS’s
and At-Large can also respond to this public comment process directly, if they
wish but the IDN-WG needs to develop any statements for ALAC to consider. And
as you will have noted the ALAC IDN-WG has recently been discussing mechanisms for
a background briefing to facilitate its efforts on all its activities...
In response to Mohamed’s email earlier today requesting ´
“Can Sheryl and Hong as ALAC representatives in the IDNC forward the
documents presented for comments/feedback to the ALAC IDN WG, in order that
ALAC IDN WG to discuss the issues and provide ALAC comments which will be
presented to the IDNC by our representatives.”
Please refer to some of my information provided above, and use what
Hong posting on Jan 8th as the reference point to begin your outreach
processes from (I have included it again below) as it lists the draft list of topics
(generated by the IDNC-WG) that comments and feedback are no doubt going to be requested
on, for input into the IDNC-WG (point 1 above).
< snip from Hong’s earlier email>
On December 14, 2007, CCNSO published the IDNC working group
charter http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idnc-charter.htm
. A "Topic list for Initial Report on introduction IDN ccTLD
under fast track" was circulated in the working group list at the same
time. The scope of the IDNC WG is limited to developing feasible methods (for
the introduction of a limited number of IDN ccTLDs) that do not pre-empt the
outcomes of the IDN ccPDP. A list of topics is drafted to form the structure of
discussion on the mechanisms of fast-track implementation. Comment and input
are sought on the relevance of the topics listed and whether there are additional
topics. Comments need to be received by 16 January {back to the IDNC-WG
regarding the TOPICS LIST---CLO inserted text for explanation}. So far, comments on the chair of the working
group, working process and nature of fast track approach have been sent to the
list.
The comments may be on 2 specific mechanisms:
1. A mechanism for the selection of the IDN ccTLD string;
Topics:
o What are the requirements regarding the status of the script/language in the
territory to be used in the IDN ccTLD string?
o Is there a limit to the number of scripts per territory to be used as an IDN
ccTLD under the fast track approach? Should it be limited to one (1) per
territory or some other number?
o Who should be able to propose a string for the territory?
o Who is required to endorse a string once proposed?
o What are the criteria for such a string to be acceptable under the fast track
(for example: meaningful representation in a selected script of the name of the
territory or recognized abbreviation as listed on ISO 3166 -1)
o Will a proposed string be 'evaluated' against criteria? If so, who will the
'evaluator' be and who will appoint them?
o Assuming a string and script are selected in accordance with proposed
criteria, should there be an objection procedure? If so, who should be eligible
to object? On what grounds? What is the
impact of an objection (for example non-eligibility under fast track)?
2. A mechanism to designate an IDN ccTLD manager
Topics:
o Should any criteria specific to IDNs be taken into consideration for the
designation of an IDN ccTLD manager?
o Are there any specific requirements regarding the technical and operational
readiness of the eligible IDN ccTLD manager?
o Should there be a proven track record for running a TLD operationally?
o Should the eligible entity have experience (operationally or experimentally)
with running IDN in the relevant script at the second and /or higher levels?
o Should adherence to the IDNA protocol and related requirements be ensured?
How should this be ensured?
o Is the registration policy of the IDN ccTLD relevant in relation to the IDNA
protocols and related requirements? If so how is adherence to such required
policy ensured?
<end snip from Hong’s earlier email>
And it is worthy to note in addition to what Hong included in
her email on the 8th, regarding the Fast Track work of the IDNC-WG that
the following points made in the IDNC-WG Charter
“The
scope of the IDNC WG is limited to developing feasible methods (for the
introduction
of a limited number of IDN ccTLDs) that do not pre-empt the
outcomes
of the IDN ccPDP.
In
considering feasible methods the IDNC WG should take into account and
be
guided by:
• The overarching requirement to
preserve the security and stability of
the
DNS;
• Compliance with the IDNA protocols;
• Input and advice from the technical
community in respect to the
implementation
of IDNs;
• Current practices for the delegation
of ccTLDs.”
I do hope this rather wordy reply from me, (OK I’m often
wordy J), has
clarified a few things for everyone and will assist the ALAC IDN-WG begin its important
policy development processes, in a timely and proactive manner, on these topics...
I am particularly keen to also hear from each RALO Secretariat (this
can go to the IDN-WG) as well as individuals and ALS’s regarding this
topic. Let me know if I can assist further... And do let me know if a IDN-WG
call is set up so if at all possible I can join it...
CLO
From: idn-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:idn-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org]
On Behalf Of Bret Fausett
Sent: Thursday, 10 January 2008 6:39 AM
To: idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org
Cc: ALAC & Secretariats Internal
Subject: Re: [IDN-WG] CCNSO IDNC WG IDN Topic List on Introduction of
ccTLD under fast-track
Thanks, Nick. A briefing would be very helpful. In the short
term though, I simply need pointers to the materials that Hong referenced. If the
current submissions on the questions posted are published somewhere, where are
they published?
Hong says the email address for the WG is ccnso-idncctld@icann.org, but I
can't seem to find the registration page or the archives of that list. Can you
share that?
If the list archives are not public, could someone who is
currently subscribed (Hong or Fatimata or Cheryl?) pass the current submissions
to this list so I can read them?
Many thanks,
Bret