Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC
Dear Edmon, Please note that the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC<https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg> is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary. Regards, Matt Ashtiani At-Large Coordination Officer ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA
Edmon/WG this is the Proposed ccNSO IDN PDP drafting document that I referenced at the last ALAC call .... I am in the WG that had authored it but would appreciate a review and Snyder comments (including supportive ones) fRom this WG for lodgement by that ALAC.... Needs not be wordy... On Sep 13, 2012 8:47 AM, "Matt Ashtiani" <matt.ashtiani@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Edmon,
Please note that the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC<https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg> is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
Hi, Cheryl. The recommendations are very comprehensive in the sense that it covers the entire process of IDNccTLD application and approval. This is excellent and should be commended. They are also drawing from past experiences with the Fast Track process, which is good. A few questions about the proposed policies: 1. Were there any sticky/contentious points in the development of the recommendations? 2. Variants are not addressed in the set of recommendations, pointing to discussions that are still ongoing, which is fine, but when the variant rules for the root zone is agreed upon, I would expect that ccTLDs would be bound by it as well as gTLDs - Any issues with raising this in the response to the document? 3. The Future Challenges WG raised the issue of the need to somehow standardize or address the issue of the diversity of ccTLD practices using ICANN's gTLD best practices etc - Perhaps this is another opportunity to raise the issue. Any thoughts on this matter? 4. The final recommendation regarding the Permanent IDNccTLD Advisory Panel calls for 1 representative from the ALAC, 2 from GAC and ccNSO respectively, and 1 from SSAC (I see a mirror of Board representation here). What about the criteria in terms of qualification or expertise level of the representatives? Were there any discussions on this? Was it the default position that it should be left to the respective bodies to determine? Best regards, Rinalia On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr@gmail.com>wrote:
Edmon/WG this is the Proposed ccNSO IDN PDP drafting document that I referenced at the last ALAC call .... I am in the WG that had authored it but would appreciate a review and Snyder comments (including supportive ones) fRom this WG for lodgement by that ALAC.... Needs not be wordy... On Sep 13, 2012 8:47 AM, "Matt Ashtiani" <matt.ashtiani@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Edmon,
Please note that the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC<https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg> is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
_______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
see below.. On Sep 22, 2012 12:22 PM, "Rinalia Abdul Rahim" < rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi, Cheryl.
The recommendations are very comprehensive in the sense that it covers
the entire process of IDNccTLD application and approval. This is excellent and should be commended. They are also drawing from past experiences with the Fast Track process, which is good.
A few questions about the proposed policies:
1. Were there any sticky/contentious points in the development of the
recommendations? 《yup but over last few years we have "worked them out" to get to this consensus view ;-) 》
2. Variants are not addressed in the set of recommendations, pointing to discussions that are still ongoing, which is fine, but when the variant rules for the root zone is agreed upon, I would expect that ccTLDs would be bound by it as well as gTLDs - Any issues with raising this in the response to the document? 《I expect so also but as it IS so important an issue I'd see raising it in s response a positive thing as it keeps other 'listed' for PDP attention...》 3. The Future Challenges WG raised the issue of the need to somehow standardize or address the issue of the diversity of ccTLD practices using ICANN's gTLD best practices etc - Perhaps this is another opportunity to raise the issue. Any thoughts on this matter? 《hmm that could cloud this issue and would be quickly deemed "Out Of Scope" for this ccTLD PDP WG.... So I would advise addressing that issue in superset fora...》 4. The final recommendation regarding the Permanent IDNccTLD Advisory Panel calls for 1 representative from the ALAC, 2 from GAC and ccNSO respectively, and 1 from SSAC (I see a mirror of Board representation here). What about the criteria in terms of qualification or expertise level of the representatives? Were there any discussions on this? Was it the default position that it should be left to the respective bodies to determine? 《No specific discussion in the WG thst criteria along with charter determination and details would be a ccNSO Council matter; but experience with these community input WG's in ccNSO has generally lead to the trust given to the sending committee/org/constituency (with I suspect an little briefing or two Chair to Chair ;-) to ensure the right talent is sent... FYI as ALAC Liaison to ccNSO this is frequently a role that gets to be for that rep... but not always...》
Best regards,
Rinalia
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr@gmail.com> wrote:
Edmon/WG this is the Proposed ccNSO IDN PDP drafting document that I referenced at the last ALAC call .... I am in the WG that had authored it but would appreciate a review and Snyder comments (including supportive ones) fRom this WG for lodgement by that ALAC.... Needs not be wordy... On Sep 13, 2012 8:47 AM, "Matt Ashtiani" <matt.ashtiani@icann.org> wrote:
Dear Edmon,
Please note that the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC<https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg> is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is
necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki:
https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
_______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
Dear Edmon, I am following up on the email below. Can you please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary. Regards, Matt Ashtiani At-Large Coordination Officer ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA From: Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:46 PM To: Edmon Chung <edmon@isoc.hk<mailto:edmon@isoc.hk>> Cc: Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com<mailto:rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>>, "idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>" <idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, ICANN At-Large Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>> Subject: Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC Dear Edmon, Please note that the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC<https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg> is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary. Regards, Matt Ashtiani At-Large Coordination Officer ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA
Dear All, Thank you Matt for bringing it to our attention. Does the ALAC need to make a statement on the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC< https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg> is now open. What are people's views on the Draft Recommendations? Kind Regards On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org>wrote:
Dear Edmon,
I am following up on the email below. Can you please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA
From: Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org<mailto: matt.ashtiani@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:46 PM To: Edmon Chung <edmon@isoc.hk<mailto:edmon@isoc.hk>> Cc: Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com<mailto: rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>>, "idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto: idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>" <idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto: idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, ICANN At-Large Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>> Subject: Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC
Dear Edmon,
Please note that the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC<https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg> is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
Hi Sala: This is a question best answered by out IDN liaison. I shall be so advised. Best, - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All,
Thank you Matt for bringing it to our attention.
Does the ALAC need to make a statement on the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC< https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg> is now open.
What are people's views on the Draft Recommendations?
Kind Regards
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org
wrote:
Dear Edmon,
I am following up on the email below. Can you please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA
From: Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org<mailto: matt.ashtiani@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:46 PM To: Edmon Chung <edmon@isoc.hk<mailto:edmon@isoc.hk>> Cc: Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com<mailto: rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>>, "idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto: idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>" <idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto: idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, ICANN At-Large Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>> Subject: Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC
Dear Edmon,
Please note that the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC<https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg> is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji
Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Thanks Carlton. If there are views from At Large on this, please let us know as discussions are underway within the ALAC IDN Working Group via its mailing list. Kind Regards, Sala On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 10:34 AM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Sala: This is a question best answered by out IDN liaison. I shall be so advised.
Best, - Carlton
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All,
Thank you Matt for bringing it to our attention.
Does the ALAC need to make a statement on the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC< https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg> is now open.
What are people's views on the Draft Recommendations?
Kind Regards
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org
wrote:
Dear Edmon,
I am following up on the email below. Can you please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA
From: Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org<mailto: matt.ashtiani@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:46 PM To: Edmon Chung <edmon@isoc.hk<mailto:edmon@isoc.hk>> Cc: Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com<mailto: rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>>, "idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto: idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>" <idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto: idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond < ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, ICANN At-Large Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>> Subject: Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC
Dear Edmon,
Please note that the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC<https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg
is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji
Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
After reviewing the document I think we can proceed with a simple response commending the work and reiterating the importance of IDN IDN TLDs. Most of the document reiterates the recommendations from the IDNC (for the fast track) with some additional adjustments based on the learning over the few years of its implementation (which have actually been addressed and updated to the latest IDN Fast Track document). Edmon -----Original Message----- From: idn-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:idn-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 12:03 PM To: Carlton Samuels Cc: apralo; idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org; At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [IDN-WG] [APAC-Discuss] [At-Large] Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC Thanks Carlton. If there are views from At Large on this, please let us know as discussions are underway within the ALAC IDN Working Group via its mailing list. Kind Regards, Sala On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 10:34 AM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Sala: This is a question best answered by out IDN liaison. I shall be so advised.
Best, - Carlton
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All,
Thank you Matt for bringing it to our attention.
Does the ALAC need to make a statement on the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC< https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg> is now open.
What are people's views on the Draft Recommendations?
Kind Regards
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org
wrote:
Dear Edmon,
I am following up on the email below. Can you please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA
From: Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org<mailto: matt.ashtiani@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:46 PM To: Edmon Chung <edmon@isoc.hk<mailto:edmon@isoc.hk>> Cc: Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com<mailto: rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>>, "idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto: idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>" <idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto: idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond < ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, ICANN At-Large Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>> Subject: Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC
Dear Edmon,
Please note that the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC<https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg
is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji
Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
works for me ... but clearly O sort of biased :-):-):-) On Sep 24, 2012 12:59 PM, "Edmon Chung" <edmon@isoc.hk> wrote:
After reviewing the document I think we can proceed with a simple response commending the work and reiterating the importance of IDN IDN TLDs.
Most of the document reiterates the recommendations from the IDNC (for the fast track) with some additional adjustments based on the learning over the few years of its implementation (which have actually been addressed and updated to the latest IDN Fast Track document).
Edmon
-----Original Message----- From: idn-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto: idn-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 12:03 PM To: Carlton Samuels Cc: apralo; idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org; At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [IDN-WG] [APAC-Discuss] [At-Large] Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC
Thanks Carlton.
If there are views from At Large on this, please let us know as discussions are underway within the ALAC IDN Working Group via its mailing list.
Kind Regards, Sala
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 10:34 AM, Carlton Samuels < carlton.samuels@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Sala: This is a question best answered by out IDN liaison. I shall be so advised.
Best, - Carlton
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All,
Thank you Matt for bringing it to our attention.
Does the ALAC need to make a statement on the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC< https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg> is now open.
What are people's views on the Draft Recommendations?
Kind Regards
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org
wrote:
Dear Edmon,
I am following up on the email below. Can you please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA
From: Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org<mailto: matt.ashtiani@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:46 PM To: Edmon Chung <edmon@isoc.hk<mailto:edmon@isoc.hk>> Cc: Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com<mailto: rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>>, "idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto: idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>" <idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto: idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond < ocl@gih.com <mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, ICANN At-Large Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>> Subject: Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC
Dear Edmon,
Please note that the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC<https://community.icann.org/x/xYUoAg
is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji
Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji
Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
_______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
Hello everyone, Please find below a draft statement on the IDNccTLD String selection. The statement is meant to be short, commends the work and addresses the variants issue. Comments for fine tuning or addressing gaps are welcome. Best regards, Rinalia * * * * *DRAFT * *ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations* The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years. We wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. We believe that IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet. We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later. We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users. END
Works for me can the ALAC consider it posted haste I wonder... On Sep 28, 2012 1:26 PM, "Rinalia Abdul Rahim" <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello everyone,
Please find below a draft statement on the IDNccTLD String selection. The statement is meant to be short, commends the work and addresses the variants issue. Comments for fine tuning or addressing gaps are welcome.
Best regards,
Rinalia
* *
* *
*DRAFT *
*ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations*
The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years.
We wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. We believe that IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet.
We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later.
We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users.
END _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
Hi Rinalia While I do not purport to be an expert on IDN issues, this statement reads very well, is very clear and sets out our remaining concerns well. Holly On 28/09/2012, at 1:17 PM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim wrote:
Hello everyone,
Please find below a draft statement on the IDNccTLD String selection. The statement is meant to be short, commends the work and addresses the variants issue. Comments for fine tuning or addressing gaps are welcome.
Best regards,
Rinalia
* *
* *
*DRAFT *
*ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations*
The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years.
We wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. We believe that IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet.
We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later.
We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users.
END _______________________________________________ ALAC-Internal mailing list ALAC-Internal@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
ALAC Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
At-Large Website: http://atlarge.icann.org
Dear Olivier, The drafted *ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations* (pasted below) has received no objections on all the ALAC and At-Large lists. I have conferred with Edmon Chung and we concur that the statement is ready for an ALAC vote. I am passing this matter over to you and staff for onward ALAC action (i.e., vote). Best regards, Rinalia *ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations* The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years. We wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. We believe that IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet. We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later. We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users. END
Dear Rinalia, thank you for your follow-up on this. The problem with starting a 5 day vote on this today is that this is the week when people are travelling to Toronto. They might miss the vote in their accumulated email. I note that the comment period closes on 18 October. Couldn't this wait for a F2F vote in our Thursday wrap-up? Kind regards, Olivier On 05/10/2012 04:07, Rinalia Abdul Rahim wrote:
Dear Olivier,
The drafted *ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations* (pasted below) has received no objections on all the ALAC and At-Large lists. I have conferred with Edmon Chung and we concur that the statement is ready for an ALAC vote. I am passing this matter over to you and staff for onward ALAC action (i.e., vote).
Best regards,
Rinalia
*ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations*
The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years.
We wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. We believe that IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet.
We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later.
We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users.
END
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Dear Olivier, F2F vote in Toronto during the ALAC meeting wrap-up is fine. Thank you. Best regards, Rinalia Abdul Rahim sent via galaxy tab On 9 Oct 2012 08:01, "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl@gih.com> wrote:
Dear Rinalia,
thank you for your follow-up on this. The problem with starting a 5 day vote on this today is that this is the week when people are travelling to Toronto. They might miss the vote in their accumulated email. I note that the comment period closes on 18 October. Couldn't this wait for a F2F vote in our Thursday wrap-up? Kind regards,
Olivier
On 05/10/2012 04:07, Rinalia Abdul Rahim wrote:
Dear Olivier,
The drafted *ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations* (pasted below) has received no objections on all the ALAC and At-Large lists. I have conferred with Edmon Chung and we concur that the statement is ready for an ALAC vote. I am passing this matter over to you and staff for onward ALAC action (i.e., vote).
Best regards,
Rinalia
*ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations*
The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years.
We wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. We believe that IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet.
We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later.
We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users.
END
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhDhttp://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Hi, this is the paragraph I promise to draft to supplement our Statement. Any revision or comment is heartily welcome. Hong _______________________ We note that confusing similarity of IDN ccTLD strings is assessed according to the appearance of the selected string sufficiently close to one or more other strings so that it is probable that a reasonable Internet user "who is unfamiliar with the script would perceive the strings to be the same or confuse one for the other", although "linguistic, technical, and visual perception factors" will be taken into consideration. Notwithstanding the merit and rational of such assessment criterion, we concern that the assessment primarily based on appearance confusion of the strings deemed by the users unfamiliar with the script may not be consistent with the nature and purpose of IDN ccTLDs that is fundamentally put into use for the benefit of the local IDN users in pertinent ccTLD territories. Without sufficient linguistic factor being taken into account, some unreasonable results may occur. For example, an IDN ccTLD that is assessed as not confusingly similar by the user "who is unfamiliar with the script" may well be deemed confusingly similar by the local IDN users; vice verse. We do hope this issue could be addressed in the policy making process and more consultation with the IDN communities in the ccTLD territories could be done. the assessment of confusing similarity depends on amongst other things in developing the method and criteria.
*ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations*
The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years.
We wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. We believe that IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet.
We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later.
We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users.
END _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
-- Professor Dr. Hong Xue Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China
*1) I support Hong: we should not lose sight of the wider purpose of IDNs "for the benefit of local IDN users".* * * *2) I propose a friendly addendum, in draft form:* *"Further, the attribution of IDNs should take into account the fact that some languages with a wide geographical distribution, beyond national borders, are not the sole property of one sovereign state alone. It follows, therefore, that due consideration should be given to protecting the rights of concerned language communities which, though falling outside the jurisdiction of one state, share with its inhabitants a common language or script".* * * *Jean-Jacques. * 2012/10/18 Hong Xue <hongxueipr@gmail.com>
Hi, this is the paragraph I promise to draft to supplement our Statement. Any revision or comment is heartily welcome.
Hong
_______________________
We note that confusing similarity of IDN ccTLD strings is assessed according to the appearance of the selected string sufficiently close to one or more other strings so that it is probable that a reasonable Internet user "who is unfamiliar with the script would perceive the strings to be the same or confuse one for the other", although "linguistic, technical, and visual perception factors" will be taken into consideration.
Notwithstanding the merit and rational of such assessment criterion, we concern that the assessment primarily based on appearance confusion of the strings deemed by the users unfamiliar with the script may not be consistent with the nature and purpose of IDN ccTLDs that is fundamentally put into use for the benefit of the local IDN users in pertinent ccTLD territories. Without sufficient linguistic factor being taken into account, some unreasonable results may occur. For example, an IDN ccTLD that is assessed as not confusingly similar by the user "who is unfamiliar with the script" may well be deemed confusingly similar by the local IDN users; vice verse.
We do hope this issue could be addressed in the policy making process and more consultation with the IDN communities in the ccTLD territories could be done.
the assessment of confusing similarity depends on amongst other things
in developing the method and criteria.
*ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations*
The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for
the
comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years.
We wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. We believe that IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet.
We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later.
We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users.
END _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
-- Professor Dr. Hong Xue Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL) Beijing Normal University http://www.iipl.org.cn/ 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street Beijing 100875 China _______________________________________________ IDN-WG mailing list IDN-WG@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/idn-wg
IDN WG Wiki: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy
Dear IDN WG and ALAC, Please find below the revised statement on the* "Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations" *that incorporates additions proposed during the Toronto meeting. Suggestions for further amendments *must be received by Friday (November 2nd)* for the ALAC to commence a vote in time to meet the Reply Period deadline on November 9th. Thanks. Rinalia Abdul Rahim* * ** * * * * *ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations* The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years. We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later. We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users. We note with concern that the draft recommendations consider selected IDN ccTLD strings to be confusingly similar based on their appearance to “a reasonable Internet user who is unfamiliar with the script” although "linguistic, technical, and visual perception factors" will be taken into consideration. Notwithstanding the merit and rationale for this assessment criterion, an assessment on confusing similarity based primarily on the appearance of selected strings to users unfamiliar with the script may not be consistent with the nature and purpose of IDN ccTLDs, which are fundamentally introduced for the use and benefit of local IDN users in pertinent ccTLD territories. Without taking into account sufficient linguistic factors, problematic results may occur. For example, an IDN ccTLD that is assessed as not confusingly similar by a user "who is unfamiliar with the script" may well be deemed confusingly similar by the local IDN user and vice versa. We believe that this particular issue can be addressed in the policy making process through more consultations with the IDN communities in implicated ccTLD territories. Finally, we wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet. Towards this end, the attribution of IDNs should take into account the fact that some languages have a wide geographical distribution that go beyond national borders and are thus not the sole property of one sovereign state alone. It follows, therefore, that due consideration should be given to protecting the rights of concerned language communities which, though falling outside the jurisdiction of one nation state, share with its inhabitants a common language or script. END
I hope my intervention at the public forum on this issue was helpful. I recall Tina Dam from .music (and former ICANN staffer) going up to say "I love IDNs, *however*, people aroiund me are saying ....". I wanted to ensure the Board was immediately reminded of the broad support for IDN prioritization within At-Large. Not that I have been deeply involved in At-Large IDN policy, but IMO Tina's comment could not let sit unanswered. And I too support Hong's and Jean-Jacques' comments. - Evan
Just quick comment on IDN ccTLD operators: I discuss this issue with Tina Dam (Evan just mentioned her), and she gave me the link http://www.icann.org/en/resources/idn/fast-track/string-evaluation-completio... There are 30 IDN ccTLDs in it. 16 were requested by existing ccTLD managers. In all other cases, including Ukraine, it is written - by "Government entity". I would like to stress out once again, that during Fast Track procedure all this information was closed. Now it is open, and a lot of issues have to be discuss. Is there any mechanism of verification of such information? What is the role of ICANN, Board, GAC, ccNSO, ALAC in dispute resolutions regarding possible conflicts between existing ccTLD managers and "Government entity" (I use quatation marks first of all for Ukrainian IDN ccTLD)? In Ukraine the problem of "confusing similarity" is of crucial importance (all Cyrillic symbols for .укр have identical symbols in Latin alphabet). How to deal with this problem just now? Best regards, Oksana 2012/10/30 Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>:
I hope my intervention at the public forum on this issue was helpful. I recall Tina Dam from .music (and former ICANN staffer) going up to say "I love IDNs, *however*, people aroiund me are saying ....". I wanted to ensure the Board was immediately reminded of the broad support for IDN prioritization within At-Large.
Not that I have been deeply involved in At-Large IDN policy, but IMO Tina's comment could not let sit unanswered.
And I too support Hong's and Jean-Jacques' comments.
- Evan _______________________________________________ ALAC-Internal mailing list ALAC-Internal@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
ALAC Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
At-Large Website: http://atlarge.icann.org
Dear Edmon, Please note that the "At-Large IDN Variant TLD Program – Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/I5AoAg>" is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary. Regards, Matt Ashtiani At-Large Coordination Officer ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA
Dear Edmon, I am following up on the email below. Can you please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary? Regards, Matt Ashtiani At-Large Coordination Officer ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA From: Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 8:06 AM To: Edmon Chung <edmon@isoc.hk<mailto:edmon@isoc.hk>> Cc: Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com<mailto:rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>>, "idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>" <idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com<mailto:ocl@gih.com>>, ICANN At-Large Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>> Subject: At-Large IDN Variant TLD Program Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels Workspace Dear Edmon, Please note that the "At-Large IDN Variant TLD Program – Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/I5AoAg>" is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary. Regards, Matt Ashtiani At-Large Coordination Officer ICANN 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA
Matt. I believe the document will undergo some changes in Toronto based on the following upcoming discussions: 1. The RootLGR Project Team meeting on 12-13 October. 2. IDN Program Update discussion session on 18th October. At the IDN WG meeting in Toronto on 17 October, we will discuss with the WG on whether or not a statement is necessary based on what we know from the first event - please prompt us about the statement in case we forget and to make sure that it is addressed, please add it to the IDN WG agenda. There will be a second public comments period on the revised document in November in case we miss the window on the first one, which I think closes on the 19th of October. Thank you. Best regards, Rinalia On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 12:07 AM, ICANN At-Large Staff < staff@atlarge.icann.org> wrote:
Dear Edmon,
I am following up on the email below. Can you please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary?
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA
From: Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani@icann.org> Date: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 8:06 AM To: Edmon Chung <edmon@isoc.hk> Cc: Rinalia Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>, " idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org" <idn-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com>, ICANN At-Large Staff < staff@atlarge.icann.org> Subject: At-Large IDN Variant TLD Program Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels Workspace
Dear Edmon,
Please note that the "At-Large IDN Variant TLD Program – Procedure to Develop and Maintain the Label Generation Rules for the Root Zone in Respect of IDNA Labels Workspace <https://community.icann.org/x/I5AoAg>" is now open. Please advise if you think a Statement on this PC is necessary.
Regards,
Matt Ashtiani
At-Large Coordination Officer
ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 USA
participants (13)
-
Carlton Samuels -
Cheryl Langdon-Orr -
Edmon Chung -
Evan Leibovitch -
Holly Raiche -
Hong Xue -
ICANN At-Large Staff -
JJS -
Matt Ashtiani -
Oksana Prykhodko -
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond -
Rinalia Abdul Rahim -
Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro