May 2018 - Idngwg - lists.icann.org

Re: [Idngwg] [Ext] haven't received any response from you
by Sarmad Hussain Sept. 3, 2018

Sept. 3, 2018

Dear Yoshitaka Okuno, Please find below the response by the IDN Guidelines Working Group (IDNGWG). Regards, Sarmad ============= Yoshitaka Okuno Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services Co., Ltd. Dear Yoshitaka Okuno, Thank you for your emails. The IDN Guidelines WG appreciates the continued input from JPRS, and had discussed the input at multiple WG meetings and the means to address it. Please note that the Guidelines 15 and 16 in the proposed version 4.0 are not new. These are a part of the existing version 3.0 of the IDN Guidelines, which are currently implemented (see https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/idn-guidelines-2011-09-02-en) The existing guideline states: 5. “All code points in a single label will be taken from the same script as determined by the Unicode Standard Annex #24: Script Names <http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr24>. Exceptions to this guideline are permissible for languages with established orthographies and conventions that require the commingled use of multiple scripts. Even in the case of this exception, visually confusable characters from different scripts will not be allowed to co-exist in a single set of permissible code points unless a corresponding policy and character table is clearly defined." For more clarity, in the proposed version 4.0 this guideline has been divided into two parts. Guideline 15 addresses the first part, while Guideline 16 covers the second part of the existing guideline: 15. All code points in a single IDN label must be taken from the same Unicode script as determined by the Unicode Standard Annex #24: Unicode Script Property (http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr24) Exceptions to this guideline are permissible for languages with established orthographies and conventions that require the commingled use of multiple Unicode scripts. Also see Additional Notes V and VI. 16. In the case of any exceptions made allowing mixing of Unicode scripts, visually confusable characters from different scripts must not be allowed to co-exist in a single set of permissible code points unless a corresponding IDN policy and IDN Table is clearly defined to minimize confusion between domain names. Also see Additional Note IV. Considering the JPRS input and additional discussion by its members, the IDN Guidelines WG has made some finer clarifications without changing the intention of the original guideline in version 3.0, as per the details below: 1. For referring to Japanese case and other cases, the WG discussed that changes should be made in Guideline 15 and not in Guideline 16. 2. The WG considered that the use of “script” may be ambiguous and so changed the text to refer explicitly to “Unicode script” as defined in the Unicode script property. This was implied in the original ver. 3.0 of the Guidelines, which had referred to UTR 24. 3. In the context of “Unicode script”, Japanese writing system uses Hiragana, Katakana and Han. Therefore, based on JPRS input, the WG agreed to qualify Japanese writing system as a case which mixes "Unicode scripts" and therefore should be allowed by default. As the guidelines themselves were intended to be generic, the WG agreed that this be done as an Additional Note and not in the text of the guideline. 4. Additional Note V was added to state that Japanese is a known case where Hiragana, Katakana and Han scripts are mixed. It also notes that Chinese, Japanese and Korean IDN tables also mix “a-z” ASCII. Additional Note VI allows additional letters like digits and hyphen to be mixed in scripts, where relevant. Therefore, cumulatively these notes allow for labels like "jpドメイン名の登録". So the Additional Notes V and VI cover the concerns raised by JPRS to pre-qualify "Unicode script"-mixing in Japanese writing system. Please also note that there are two separate guidelines which call for addressing similarity and confusability - no. 14 specifically for within-script cases and no. 16 specifically for allowed cross-script cases. Therefore, no. 16 was not altered to be more generic. Both these guidelines point to Additional Note IV, which suggest additional mechanisms for this purpose. We hope this clarifies the motivations of the WG on how it has tried to address the input from JPRS. Please let us know if you have any further input or concerns. Regards, IDN Guidelines WG -----Original Message----- From: yoshitaka(a)jprs.co.jp [mailto:yoshitaka@jprs.co.jp] Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 2:49 PM To: Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg(a)iis.se> Cc: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org>; Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] haven't received any response from you Dear IDN guidelines WG Chair, (CC: Sarmad、Pitinan) On 30 March, I sent you our proposed change on the IDN implementation guidelines document, following the suggestion made in the WG public meeting in San Juan on 12 March (pasted below). For these one and half months, I have not received any response to that from you. Today, I happened to find that "Final Proposed Draft v. 4.0 of the IDN Guidelines" https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_anno uncement-2D2018-2D05-2D10-2Den&d=DwICJg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms 7xcl4I5cM&r=KTETvEaGPwPcawI-QmNa-kiv-ZBvdgyyLm-mxd028M4&m=zptC-TxcZW1PmY1jJ5 LzXVqPvD3ZlsiKvb4agfECycQ&s=wxk9m-mdZnan6Q2PmV36GLfLEXk6eKFuZRXMIFdZLeg&e= was published. It was a surprise and disappointing for us to find it without prior correspondence regarding our proposal sent to you on 30 March. Yoshitaka Okuno Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services Co., Ltd. On Fri, 30 Mar 2018 17:40:59 +0900 yoshitaka(a)jprs.co.jp wrote: > Dear IDN guidelines working group, > > Please refer to the following comments and proposal. > The comments and proposal are being sent to you, following your > suggestion made in IDN Guidelines Working Group meeting in San Juan. > > In the working group meeting, the essence was orally stated by Hiro > Hotta, JPRS in the meeting room. > > I hope this may be of help to you. > > > [Summary] > > 1. As described in current guidelines, the issues of visually confusable > characters are not specific to the cases with commingled use of > multiple scripts. > > We believe Japanese domain labels fall on the exceptional cases > stated in Guideline#15. > Kanji, Hiragana, and Katakana scrips are daily used in a > commingled manner based on established orthographies and > conventions in Japan. Such comingled use is allowed even in > single words. This means Japanese people consider the collective > set of Kanji, Hiragana, and Katakana characters to belong to ONE > script in constituting Japanese words, just as native English > writers/readers consider English characters to belong to ONE > script. > > Therefore, in the case where comingled use of UNICODE scripts is > allowed by Guideline#15, restrictions (if any) should be the same > as in the case of one UNICODE script in constituting domain > labels. > > 2. In Additional Note IV, the guidelines of visually confusable > characters are described. We think they are the good notes because > the issues of visually confusable characters are clearly pointed. > > Taking into account the fact that issues of visually confusable > characters reside both in the case of a single UNICODE script and > in the case where comingled UNICODE scripts are allowed, we think > the sentence "must not be allowed to" is overdescribed in > guideline#16. > > [Suggestion] > > We would like to propose as follows. > > - The guideline#16 is removed from section 2.5.2 and is moved to > a newly created section between 2.5.2 and 2.5.3. The new section > is headlined as "2.5.X Visually confusable characters". > > - The guideline#16 will be modified as follows. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > 16. > Visually confusable characters had better not co-exist in a single > set of permissible code points. TLD registries should clearly > define a corresponding policy and IDN Table to minimize confusion > between domain names. Also see Additional Note IV. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks for your consideration. > ---- > Yoshitaka Okuno > Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services Co., > Ltd. > >

7 25

Re: [Idngwg] [Ext] haven't received any response from you
by Tan Tanaka, Dennis June 12, 2018

June 12, 2018

I believe Yoshitaka-san has misunderstood our response. He states, "We have understood that Japanese language *shall not* be considered as "mixing of Unicode scripts" written in Guideline #16." (emphasis added) actually, the opposite is true. That is why we added the qualifier "Unicode" to the word "script" (as stated in IDNGWG's response). If this is correct, I recommend we respond accordingly to keep it on record and to avoid future misunderstanding with JRPS folks. -D On 5/28/18, 1:32 AM, "Idngwg on behalf of Sarmad Hussain" <idngwg-bounces(a)icann.org on behalf of sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org> wrote: Dear IDNGWG members, Kindly advise how you would like to respond to the following message. Regards, Sarmad -----Original Message----- From: yoshitaka(a)jprs.co.jp [mailto:yoshitaka@jprs.co.jp] Sent: Monday, May 28, 2018 9:06 AM To: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org> Cc: yoshitaka(a)jprs.co.jp; Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo(a)icann.org>; idngwg(a)icann.org Subject: RE: [Ext] haven't received any response from you Dear IDNGWG and Sarmad Hussain, Thank you for your response. We summarized our understanding as below. Should this mail doesn't reach IDNGWG, I'd appreciate it if Mr. Sarmad could forward it to IDNGWG. We have recognized that IDNGWG added Additional Note V and VI to the Guideline as a result of discussion on our comments. We have understood that Japanese language shall not be considered as "mixing of Unicode scripts" written in Guideline #16. Thanks again for your assistance. Best Regards, ---- Yoshitaka Okuno Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services Co., Ltd. On Fri, 18 May 2018 06:04:54 +0000 Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org> wrote: > Dear Yoshitaka Okuno, > > Please find below the response by the IDN Guidelines Working Group (IDNGWG). > > Regards, > Sarmad > ============= > > Yoshitaka Okuno > Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services Co., Ltd. > > Dear Yoshitaka Okuno, > > Thank you for your emails. The IDN Guidelines WG appreciates the > continued input from JPRS, and had discussed the input at multiple WG > meetings and the means to address it. > > Please note that the Guidelines 15 and 16 in the proposed version 4.0 > are not new. These are a part of the existing version 3.0 of the IDN > Guidelines, which are currently implemented (see > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_res > ources_pages_idn-2Dguidelines-2D2011-2D09-2D02-2Den&d=DwICJg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrc rwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=KTETvEaGPwPcawI-QmNa-kiv-ZBvdgyyLm-mxd028M4 &m=KR3mHCS8MRtbT2mH1CivMpm_Vg71we-wvho7cqN5Z9Q&s=FeWKN256bvrq6yzR-dhED-qNb7W nq8_cy1tkQv6CwGA&e=). The existing guideline states: > > 5. “All code points in a single label will be taken from the > same script as determined by the Unicode Standard Annex #24: Script > Names > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.unicode.org_r > eports_tr24&d=DwICJg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=K > TETvEaGPwPcawI-QmNa-kiv-ZBvdgyyLm-mxd028M4&m=KR3mHCS8MRtbT2mH1CivMpm_V > g71we-wvho7cqN5Z9Q&s=wkkgI6r04K42Ol_7w4Xo__C0IXBtXIKYZmKGmP4teq0&e=>. > Exceptions to this guideline are permissible for languages with established orthographies and conventions that require the commingled use of multiple scripts. Even in the case of this exception, visually confusable characters from different scripts will not be allowed to co-exist in a single set of permissible code points unless a corresponding policy and character table is clearly defined." > > For more clarity, in the proposed version 4.0 this guideline has been > divided into two parts. Guideline 15 addresses the first part, while > Guideline 16 covers the second part of the existing guideline: > > 15. All code points in a single IDN label must be taken from the > same Unicode script as determined by the Unicode Standard Annex #24: > Unicode Script Property > (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.unicode.org_r > eports_tr24&d=DwICJg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=KTETvEa GPwPcawI-QmNa-kiv-ZBvdgyyLm-mxd028M4&m=KR3mHCS8MRtbT2mH1CivMpm_Vg71we-wvho7c qN5Z9Q&s=wkkgI6r04K42Ol_7w4Xo__C0IXBtXIKYZmKGmP4teq0&e=). Exceptions to this guideline are permissible for languages with established orthographies and conventions that require the commingled use of multiple Unicode scripts. > Also see Additional Notes V and VI. > > 16. In the case of any exceptions made allowing mixing of Unicode > scripts, visually confusable characters from different scripts must > not be allowed to co-exist in a single set of permissible code points > unless a corresponding IDN policy and IDN Table is clearly defined to > minimize confusion between domain names. Also see Additional Note IV. > > Considering the JPRS input and additional discussion by its members, > the IDN Guidelines WG has made some finer clarifications without > changing the intention of the original guideline in version 3.0, as > per the details > below: > > 1. For referring to Japanese case and other cases, the WG > discussed that changes should be made in Guideline 15 and not in > Guideline 16. > 2. The WG considered that the use of “script” may be ambiguous > and so changed the text to refer explicitly to “Unicode script” as > defined in the Unicode script property. This was implied in the > original ver. 3.0 of the Guidelines, which had referred to UTR 24. > 3. In the context of “Unicode script”, Japanese writing system > uses Hiragana, Katakana and Han. Therefore, based on JPRS input, the > WG agreed to qualify Japanese writing system as a case which mixes > "Unicode scripts" and therefore should be allowed by default. As the > guidelines themselves were intended to be generic, the WG agreed that > this be done as an Additional Note and not in the text of the guideline. > 4. Additional Note V was added to state that Japanese is a known > case where Hiragana, Katakana and Han scripts are mixed. It also notes > that Chinese, Japanese and Korean IDN tables also mix “a-z” ASCII. > Additional Note VI allows additional letters like digits and hyphen to > be mixed in scripts, where relevant. Therefore, cumulatively these > notes allow for labels like "jpドメイン名の登録". So the Additional Notes V > and VI cover the concerns raised by JPRS to pre-qualify "Unicode > script"-mixing in Japanese writing system. > > Please also note that there are two separate guidelines which call for > addressing similarity and confusability - no. 14 specifically for > within-script cases and no. 16 specifically for allowed cross-script cases. > Therefore, no. 16 was not altered to be more generic. Both these > guidelines point to Additional Note IV, which suggest additional > mechanisms for this purpose. > > We hope this clarifies the motivations of the WG on how it has tried > to address the input from JPRS. Please let us know if you have any > further input or concerns. > > Regards, > IDN Guidelines WG > > > -----Original Message----- > From: yoshitaka(a)jprs.co.jp [mailto:yoshitaka@jprs.co.jp] > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 2:49 PM > To: Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg(a)iis.se> > Cc: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org>; Pitinan Kooarmornpatana > <pitinan.koo(a)icann.org> > Subject: [Ext] haven't received any response from you > > Dear IDN guidelines WG Chair, > (CC: Sarmad、Pitinan) > > On 30 March, I sent you our proposed change on the IDN implementation > guidelines document, following the suggestion made in the WG public > meeting in San Juan on 12 March (pasted below). For these one and half > months, I have not received any response to that from you. > > Today, I happened to find that "Final Proposed Draft v. 4.0 of the IDN > Guidelines" > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_new > s_anno > uncement-2D2018-2D05-2D10-2Den&d=DwICJg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPS > S6sJms > 7xcl4I5cM&r=KTETvEaGPwPcawI-QmNa-kiv-ZBvdgyyLm-mxd028M4&m=zptC-TxcZW1P > mY1jJ5 > LzXVqPvD3ZlsiKvb4agfECycQ&s=wxk9m-mdZnan6Q2PmV36GLfLEXk6eKFuZRXMIFdZLe > g&e= > was published. > > It was a surprise and disappointing for us to find it without prior > correspondence regarding our proposal sent to you on 30 March. > > Yoshitaka Okuno > Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services Co., Ltd. > > > On Fri, 30 Mar 2018 17:40:59 +0900 > yoshitaka(a)jprs.co.jp wrote: > > Dear IDN guidelines working group, > > > > Please refer to the following comments and proposal. > > The comments and proposal are being sent to you, following your > > suggestion made in IDN Guidelines Working Group meeting in San Juan. > > > > In the working group meeting, the essence was orally stated by Hiro > > Hotta, JPRS in the meeting room. > > > > I hope this may be of help to you. > > > > > > [Summary] > > > > 1. As described in current guidelines, the issues of visually confusable > > characters are not specific to the cases with commingled use of > > multiple scripts. > > > > We believe Japanese domain labels fall on the exceptional cases > > stated in Guideline#15. > > Kanji, Hiragana, and Katakana scrips are daily used in a > > commingled manner based on established orthographies and > > conventions in Japan. Such comingled use is allowed even in > > single words. This means Japanese people consider the collective > > set of Kanji, Hiragana, and Katakana characters to belong to ONE > > script in constituting Japanese words, just as native English > > writers/readers consider English characters to belong to ONE > > script. > > > > Therefore, in the case where comingled use of UNICODE scripts is > > allowed by Guideline#15, restrictions (if any) should be the same > > as in the case of one UNICODE script in constituting domain > > labels. > > > > 2. In Additional Note IV, the guidelines of visually confusable > > characters are described. We think they are the good notes because > > the issues of visually confusable characters are clearly pointed. > > > > Taking into account the fact that issues of visually confusable > > characters reside both in the case of a single UNICODE script and > > in the case where comingled UNICODE scripts are allowed, we think > > the sentence "must not be allowed to" is overdescribed in > > guideline#16. > > > > [Suggestion] > > > > We would like to propose as follows. > > > > - The guideline#16 is removed from section 2.5.2 and is moved to > > a newly created section between 2.5.2 and 2.5.3. The new section > > is headlined as "2.5.X Visually confusable characters". > > > > - The guideline#16 will be modified as follows. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 16. > > Visually confusable characters had better not co-exist in a single > > set of permissible code points. TLD registries should clearly > > define a corresponding policy and IDN Table to minimize confusion > > between domain names. Also see Additional Note IV. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Thanks for your consideration. > > ---- > > Yoshitaka Okuno > > Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services > > Co., Ltd. > > > > > > >

2 2

traceability matrix for the IDN Guidelines
by Sarmad Hussain May 19, 2018

May 19, 2018

Dear IDN Guideline WG members, FYI: Please find attached the traceability matrix between proposed v. 4.0 and current v. 3.0 of the IDN Guidelines. Please let us know If you have any feedback. Regards, Sarmad

1 0

FW: [Ext] haven't received any response from you
by Sarmad Hussain May 16, 2018

May 16, 2018

Dear All, We received the following communication from JPRS today. Please let us know how you would want to respond to it. Regards, Sarmad -----Original Message----- From: yoshitaka(a)jprs.co.jp [mailto:yoshitaka@jprs.co.jp] Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 2:49 AM To: Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg(a)iis.se> Cc: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org>; Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] haven't received any response from you Dear IDN guidelines WG Chair, (CC: Sarmad、Pitinan) On 30 March, I sent you our proposed change on the IDN implementation guidelines document, following the suggestion made in the WG public meeting in San Juan on 12 March (pasted below). For these one and half months, I have not received any response to that from you. Today, I happened to find that "Final Proposed Draft v. 4.0 of the IDN Guidelines" https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_anno uncement-2D2018-2D05-2D10-2Den&d=DwICJg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms 7xcl4I5cM&r=KTETvEaGPwPcawI-QmNa-kiv-ZBvdgyyLm-mxd028M4&m=zptC-TxcZW1PmY1jJ5 LzXVqPvD3ZlsiKvb4agfECycQ&s=wxk9m-mdZnan6Q2PmV36GLfLEXk6eKFuZRXMIFdZLeg&e= was published. It was a surprise and disappointing for us to find it without prior correspondence regarding our proposal sent to you on 30 March. Yoshitaka Okuno Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services Co., Ltd. On Fri, 30 Mar 2018 17:40:59 +0900 yoshitaka(a)jprs.co.jp wrote: > Dear IDN guidelines working group, > > Please refer to the following comments and proposal. > The comments and proposal are being sent to you, following your > suggestion made in IDN Guidelines Working Group meeting in San Juan. > > In the working group meeting, the essence was orally stated by Hiro > Hotta, JPRS in the meeting room. > > I hope this may be of help to you. > > > [Summary] > > 1. As described in current guidelines, the issues of visually confusable > characters are not specific to the cases with commingled use of > multiple scripts. > > We believe Japanese domain labels fall on the exceptional cases > stated in Guideline#15. > Kanji, Hiragana, and Katakana scrips are daily used in a > commingled manner based on established orthographies and > conventions in Japan. Such comingled use is allowed even in > single words. This means Japanese people consider the collective > set of Kanji, Hiragana, and Katakana characters to belong to ONE > script in constituting Japanese words, just as native English > writers/readers consider English characters to belong to ONE > script. > > Therefore, in the case where comingled use of UNICODE scripts is > allowed by Guideline#15, restrictions (if any) should be the same > as in the case of one UNICODE script in constituting domain > labels. > > 2. In Additional Note IV, the guidelines of visually confusable > characters are described. We think they are the good notes because > the issues of visually confusable characters are clearly pointed. > > Taking into account the fact that issues of visually confusable > characters reside both in the case of a single UNICODE script and > in the case where comingled UNICODE scripts are allowed, we think > the sentence "must not be allowed to" is overdescribed in > guideline#16. > > [Suggestion] > > We would like to propose as follows. > > - The guideline#16 is removed from section 2.5.2 and is moved to > a newly created section between 2.5.2 and 2.5.3. The new section > is headlined as "2.5.X Visually confusable characters". > > - The guideline#16 will be modified as follows. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > 16. > Visually confusable characters had better not co-exist in a single > set of permissible code points. TLD registries should clearly > define a corresponding policy and IDN Table to minimize confusion > between domain names. Also see Additional Note IV. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks for your consideration. > ---- > Yoshitaka Okuno > Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services Co., > Ltd. > >

5 11

Canceled: IDN Guideline WG meeting
by Sarmad Hussain May 15, 2018

May 15, 2018

How to connect: [GlobalMeet] [https://cobranding-pgi.s3.amazonaws.com/1/Logo1.png] You're invited. You've been invited to a GlobalMeet® audio meeting. Have the meeting call you. Click the Connect Me link below. No need to dial-in. Connect Me[go.conferencinghub.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__go.conferencinghub.com…> Not at your computer? You can join by dialing one of the access numbers below. Dial in Number USA /Canada (toll free): 1-866-398-2885 Guest Passcode: 599 105 1297 Additional Access: USA: 1-605-475-5604 USA: 1-712-770-4203 USA: 1-719-457-6209 Canada, Calgary: +1 403 407 5793 Canada, Montreal: +1 514 669 5928 Canada, Toronto: +1 647 426 9172 Canada, Vancouver: +1 604 222 7836 Argentina, Buenos Aires: +54 (0) 11 5172 6003 Argentina (toll free): 0800 800 1223 Australia, Sydney: +61 (0) 2 8017 6064 Australia, Melbourne: +61 (0) 3 8687 0553 Australia, Brisbane: +61 (0) 7 3015 0535 Australia (toll free): 1 800 804 786 Austria, Vienna: +43 (0)1 928 2773 Austria (toll free): 0800 070 981 Bahrain, Manama: +973 1619 8739 Bahrain (toll free): 800 04212 Belarus (toll free): 8 820 0011 0341 Belgium, Brussels: +32 (0) 2 400 6928 Belgium (toll free): 0800 39279 Bosnia and Herzegovina: +387 7031 1442 Brazil, Sao Paulo: +55 11 4935 7169 Brazil, Rio de Janeiro: +55 21 4560 0072 Brazil (toll free): 0800 887 0233 Bulgaria, Sofia: +359 (0) 2 491 6045 Bulgaria (toll free): 00800 111 4950 Cambodia, Phnom Penh: +855 23 965 723 Canada (toll free): 1 855 950 3717 Chile, Santiago: +56 (0) 2 2666 0696 Chile (toll free): 171 800 835 783 China (national): +400 613 8103 China, Beijing: +86 10 5667 0003 China, Shanghai: +86 21 2039 7081 Colombia, Bogota: +57 1 508 8137 Colombia (toll free): 01 800 755 0102 Costa Rica (toll free): 800 542 5328 Croatia (toll free): 0800 805 940 Cyprus (toll free): 800 97424 Czech Republic, Prague: +420 225 986 554 Czech Republic (toll free): 800 701 532 Denmark, Copenhagen: +45 32 72 78 10 Denmark (toll free): 80 70 35 86 Egypt (toll free): 0800 000 0593 Estonia, Tallinn: +372 622 6551 Estonia (toll free): 800 011 1589 Fiji (toll free): 00800 3322 Finland, Helsinki: +358 (0) 9 2310 1677 Finland (toll free): 0800 772 236 France, Paris: +33 (0) 1 70 37 16 56 France (toll free): 0800 946 531 France (national): 0811 655 100 France (national): 0821 231 671 Georgia, Tbilisi: +995 32 2 050 778 Germany, Frankfurt: +49 (0) 69 2222 10612 Germany, Munich: +49 (0) 89 2030 31207 Germany (national): 01801 003 899 Germany (toll free): 0800 588 9170 Greece, Athens: +30 211 181 3824 Greece (toll free): 00800 128 913 Hong Kong: +852 3018 9111 Hong Kong (toll free): 800 901 787 Hungary, Budapest: +36 1408 8953 Hungary (toll free): 068 001 9673 Iceland (toll free): 800 9847 India, Delhi: +91 11 6310 0268 India, Mumbai: +91 22 6310 0298 India, Chennai: +91 44 6310 0234 India, Bangalore: +91 80 6760 8755 India (toll free): 1800 3010 1582 Indonesia, Jakarta: +62 21 2188 9084 Indonesia (toll free): 007 803 321 8927 Ireland, Dublin: +353 (0) 1 526 9421 Ireland (national): 0818 270 271 Ireland (toll free): 1800 937 649 Ireland (national): 1890 907 630 Israel, Tel Aviv: +972 (0)3 721 7943 Israel (toll free): 1809 213 168 Italy, Milan: +39 02 3600 8006 Italy, Rome: +39 06 8750 0676 Italy (toll free): 800 146 094 Japan, Tokyo: +81 3 4560 1270 Japan, Osaka: +81 6 4560 2410 Japan (toll free): 0120 305 211 Japan (mobile): 0120 632 611 Japan (national): 0570 085 744 Jordan (toll free): 0800 22172 Kazakhstan (toll free): 8800 333 7554 Kenya, Nairobi: +254 (0)207 643 581 South Korea, Seoul: +82 (0) 2 6007 0079 South Korea (toll free): 00798 6136 1454 Latvia, Riga: +371 6601 3627 Latvia (toll free): 8000 4418 Lithuania, Vilnius: +370 5205 5468 Lithuania (toll free): 8800 31449 Luxembourg: +352 2088 1749 Luxembourg (toll free): 800 28433 Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur: +60 (0) 3 7724 8010 Malaysia (toll free): 1 800 816 152 Mexico, Guadalajara: +52 33 4162 4504 Mexico, Mexico City: +52 55 8421 0326 Mexico, Monterrey: +52 81 4162 5648 Mexico (toll free): 01 800 733 4102 Morocco, Casablanca: +212 (0) 520 48 0022 Morocco (toll free): 0800 091 296 Netherlands, Amsterdam: +31 (0) 20 716 8345 Netherlands (toll free): 0800 020 2597 New Zealand, Christchurch: +64 (0) 3 974 2596 New Zealand, Wellington: +64 (0) 4 909 4674 New Zealand, Auckland: +64 (0) 9 929 1825 New Zealand (toll free): 0800 452 947 Nigeria, Lagos: +234 1 277 3944 Norway, Oslo: +47 21 00 48 15 Norway (toll free): 800 56081 Oman (toll free): 800 77265 Pakistan, Islamabad: +92 5181 08863 Panama, Panama City: +507 8 335 913 Panama (toll free): 00800 223 1390 Peru, Lima: +51 (0) 1 700 9571 Philippines, Manila: +63 (0)2 395 3426 Philippines (toll free): 1 800 111 013 99 Poland, Warsaw: +48 22 295 3570 Poland (toll free): 00 800 121 4356 Portugal, Lisbon: +351 21 316 4093 Portugal (toll free): 800 784 442 Qatar (freephone): 00 800 100 491 Romania, Bucharest: +40 (0) 21 529 3992 Romania (toll free): 0800 801 035 Russia, Moscow: +7 495 646 9181 Russia (toll free): 8 800 500 9241 Saudi Arabia (toll free): 800 844 6641 Saudi Arabia (toll free): 800 850 0219 Serbia (toll free): 0800 190 712 Singapore: +65 6654 9112 Singapore (toll free): 800 616 3192 Slovakia, Bratislava: +421 (0)2 3321 5498 Slovakia (toll free): 0800 002 002 Slovenia, Ljubljana: +386 1600 8695 Slovenia (toll free): 0800 81193 South Africa, Johannesburg: +27 (0)11 589 8321 South Africa (toll free): 0800 999 434 Spain, Madrid: +34 91 114 6653 Spain, Barcelona: +34 93 800 1946 Spain (toll free): 900 828 035 Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka: +94 720 910 333 Sweden, Stockholm: +46 (0) 8 5065 3956 Sweden (toll free): 0200 125 588 Switzerland, Geneva: +41 (0) 22 595 4795 Switzerland, Zurich: +41 (0) 44 580 7207 Switzerland (toll free): 0800 740 360 Taiwan, Taipei: +886 (0) 2 2650 7329 Taiwan (toll free): 0800 666 596 Thailand, Bangkok: +66 (0) 2104 0761 Thailand (toll free): 001 800 6136 1473 Tunisia, Tunis: +216 31 378 101 Turkey, Istanbul: +90 212 375 50 49 Turkey (toll free): 00800 4488 26642 Ukraine (toll free): 0800 500 896 UAE (toll free): 8000 3570 2662 UK (03): +44 (0)330 336 6002 UK (toll free): 0800 358 6385 UK (national): 0844 473 5010 UK (national): 0845 545 0015 USA /Canada (toll free): 1-866-398-2885 Uruguay (toll free): 0004 019 0152 Venezuela, Caracas: +58 212 720 2164 Venezuela (toll free): 0 800 162 7451 Vietnam, Hanoi: +84 24 4458 3312 Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh: +84 28 4458 1322 Vietnam (toll free): 1800 9226

1 0

Re: [Idngwg] [Ext] haven't received any response from you
by Sarmad Hussain May 15, 2018

May 15, 2018

Dear Yoshitaka Okuno, Thank you for your email. Kindly note that some members of the WG are currently attending the GDD summit in Vancouver, so there may be some delay in further response. We will get back to you soon. Regards, Sarmad -----Original Message----- From: yoshitaka(a)jprs.co.jp [mailto:yoshitaka@jprs.co.jp] Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 2:49 PM To: Mats Dufberg <mats.dufberg(a)iis.se> Cc: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org>; Pitinan Kooarmornpatana <pitinan.koo(a)icann.org> Subject: [Ext] haven't received any response from you Dear IDN guidelines WG Chair, (CC: Sarmad、Pitinan) On 30 March, I sent you our proposed change on the IDN implementation guidelines document, following the suggestion made in the WG public meeting in San Juan on 12 March (pasted below). For these one and half months, I have not received any response to that from you. Today, I happened to find that "Final Proposed Draft v. 4.0 of the IDN Guidelines" https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_news_anno uncement-2D2018-2D05-2D10-2Den&d=DwICJg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms 7xcl4I5cM&r=KTETvEaGPwPcawI-QmNa-kiv-ZBvdgyyLm-mxd028M4&m=zptC-TxcZW1PmY1jJ5 LzXVqPvD3ZlsiKvb4agfECycQ&s=wxk9m-mdZnan6Q2PmV36GLfLEXk6eKFuZRXMIFdZLeg&e= was published. It was a surprise and disappointing for us to find it without prior correspondence regarding our proposal sent to you on 30 March. Yoshitaka Okuno Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services Co., Ltd. On Fri, 30 Mar 2018 17:40:59 +0900 yoshitaka(a)jprs.co.jp wrote: > Dear IDN guidelines working group, > > Please refer to the following comments and proposal. > The comments and proposal are being sent to you, following your > suggestion made in IDN Guidelines Working Group meeting in San Juan. > > In the working group meeting, the essence was orally stated by Hiro > Hotta, JPRS in the meeting room. > > I hope this may be of help to you. > > > [Summary] > > 1. As described in current guidelines, the issues of visually confusable > characters are not specific to the cases with commingled use of > multiple scripts. > > We believe Japanese domain labels fall on the exceptional cases > stated in Guideline#15. > Kanji, Hiragana, and Katakana scrips are daily used in a > commingled manner based on established orthographies and > conventions in Japan. Such comingled use is allowed even in > single words. This means Japanese people consider the collective > set of Kanji, Hiragana, and Katakana characters to belong to ONE > script in constituting Japanese words, just as native English > writers/readers consider English characters to belong to ONE > script. > > Therefore, in the case where comingled use of UNICODE scripts is > allowed by Guideline#15, restrictions (if any) should be the same > as in the case of one UNICODE script in constituting domain > labels. > > 2. In Additional Note IV, the guidelines of visually confusable > characters are described. We think they are the good notes because > the issues of visually confusable characters are clearly pointed. > > Taking into account the fact that issues of visually confusable > characters reside both in the case of a single UNICODE script and > in the case where comingled UNICODE scripts are allowed, we think > the sentence "must not be allowed to" is overdescribed in > guideline#16. > > [Suggestion] > > We would like to propose as follows. > > - The guideline#16 is removed from section 2.5.2 and is moved to > a newly created section between 2.5.2 and 2.5.3. The new section > is headlined as "2.5.X Visually confusable characters". > > - The guideline#16 will be modified as follows. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > 16. > Visually confusable characters had better not co-exist in a single > set of permissible code points. TLD registries should clearly > define a corresponding policy and IDN Table to minimize confusion > between domain names. Also see Additional Note IV. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks for your consideration. > ---- > Yoshitaka Okuno > Manager, Services Development Department Japan Registry Services Co., > Ltd. > >

1 0

Re: [Idngwg] [Ext] RE: Final draft of updated IDN Guidelines version 4.0
by Tan Tanaka, Dennis May 11, 2018

May 11, 2018

Looks good to me. Thank you, Dennis From: Idngwg <idngwg-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 at 12:48 PM To: "idngwg(a)icann.org" <idngwg(a)icann.org> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Idngwg] [Ext] RE: Final draft of updated IDN Guidelines version 4.0 Dear all, Please find attached the redline version of the updated document. This includes the edits suggested by Edmon incorporated in the latest version of the document. It also specifies whether the variant refers to a code point or a label. We have referred to variant code point also as “variant rules”. I have tried to adjust that to refer consistently to variant code points – just to make sure these do not get confused with label evaluation rules. Please let us know if you have any further feedback. Again, we are aiming to publish this on 9 May (LA time). If you need more time to review, please let us know. Regards, Sarmad From: Idngwg [mailto:idngwg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Sarmad Hussain Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 8:40 AM To: Edmon <edmon(a)registry.asia> Cc: idngwg(a)icann.org Subject: Re: [Idngwg] [Ext] RE: Final draft of updated IDN Guidelines version 4.0 Hi Edmon. Thank you for the feedback. I will incorporate these in the latest version and circulate it shortly. I will also try to add detail on whether the variants being referred to are code points or labels. Regards, Sarmad From: Edmon [mailto:edmon@registry.asia] Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 1:33 AM To: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain(a)icann.org<mailto:sarmad.hussain@icann.org>>; idnprogram(a)icann.org<mailto:idnprogram@icann.org> Cc: idngwg(a)icann.org<mailto:idngwg@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] RE: [Idngwg] Final draft of updated IDN Guidelines version 4.0 Sorry this came late. Made a number of suggested edits basically to follow our own glossary to use IDN variants where appropriate rather than just “varaints”. See if can update if not too late. Edmon From: Idngwg [mailto:idngwg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Sarmad Hussain Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 5:19 AM To: idnprogram(a)icann.org<mailto:idnprogram@icann.org> Cc: idngwg(a)icann.org<mailto:idngwg@icann.org> Subject: [Idngwg] Final draft of updated IDN Guidelines version 4.0 Dear IDN Program, Please find attached the cover note and the IDN Implementation Guidelines version 4.0, as updated by the IDN Guidelines WG. Kindly note additional implementation points noted in the cover note, as applicable to the IDN Guidelines. Regards, Sarmad (for IDN Guidelines WG)

5 6

FW: Request to forward final draft of IDN Guidelines ver. 4.0 to RySG
by Russ Weinstein May 9, 2018

May 9, 2018

Apologies I mistyped the IDN WG email address when I sent the note the RySG. Thanks, Russ From: Russ Weinstein Sent: Wednesday, May 9, 2018 8:16 AM To: 'Paul Diaz' <pdiaz(a)pir.org> Cc: 'idnwg(a)icann.org' <idnwg(a)icann.org> Subject: FW: Request to forward final draft of IDN Guidelines ver. 4.0 to RySG Dear Paul, The IDN Guidelines working group is preparing to publish the final draft of the IDN Guidelines 4.0 later this week. As a courtesy they asked that we share the guidelines directly with the stakeholder groups and their members. Please find the attached cover note from the IDN Guideline working group and the draft IDN guidelines. It is important to note the IDN Guidelines are incorporated by reference into the registry agreements, and thus following approval by Board would become contractual obligations for the registries. If you would please share these with your members it would be appreciated. Thanks, Russ

1 0

Final draft of updated IDN Guidelines version 4.0
by Sarmad Hussain May 8, 2018

May 8, 2018

Dear IDN Program, Please find attached the cover note and the IDN Implementation Guidelines version 4.0, as updated by the IDN Guidelines WG. Kindly note additional implementation points noted in the cover note, as applicable to the IDN Guidelines. Regards, Sarmad (for IDN Guidelines WG)

2 3

Final draft of IDN Guidelines ver. 4.0 to RrSG
by Jennifer Gore May 7, 2018

May 7, 2018

Dear Graeme, Tobias and Zoe, The IDN Guidelines Working Group has completed the final draft of the IDN Guidelines (v4.0) attached herein along with the associated cover letter. If you would be so kind, please forward to the RrSG. Thank you, Jennifer jennifer gore icann | director of registrar SERviCES & ENGAGEMENT phone + 1 202.340.9631 email jennifer.gore(a)icann.org skype jennifer.gore.icann

1 0