[ccnso-idncctld] FW: Today's IDNC WG conference Call ..

["Chris Disspain" <ceo@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

  _____  

From: Manal Ismail [mailto:manal@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, 23 April 2008 01:21
To: Chris Disspain; Janis Karklins; Bart Boswinkel
Subject: Today's IDNC WG conference Call ..
 
Dear Sirs ..
 
I was not able to hear everything that has been discussed in today's IDNC
WG conference call .. The call was a bit noisy with echo and occasional
voice cut offs .. and finally I guess there was some technical problem and
I lost connection ..
 
So please allow me share with you, in writing, my comments on the 3 agenda
items:
 
a)   The 'language committee' and its role: 
Chris explained that the language committee's role is simply to confirm
that a submitted string follows the language & meaningful criteria as
agreed (i.e. acronym, part of name or name of territory, in official
language) to which I agree .. Among other interventions and comments Ram
Mohan raised the issue of confusingly similar characters where I would
like to submit the following:
 
We have 2 options for IDN ccTLDs:
-       IDN ccTLDs that can be represented only in one form (no other
confusingly similar forms) -> this is a straight forward case not causing
any problems ..
-       IDN ccTLDs that may be represented in a variety of forms by using
characters that look exactly the same but have different Unicode
(confusingly similar characters) and this I think has 2 potential
problems:
 
1.   One that has to do with uniqueness of domain names, fishing and
copyrights .. and this happens when other registrants or hackers try to
register another valid form of a registered domain name -> and I don't
think we may run into this situation within the fast track as no other
country may try to apply for one form of another country's name ..
specially that within fast track we are dealing with extremely straight
forward cases ..
 
2.   The other potential problem has to do with the end-user and
accessibility of such a domain name (also known as 'side of the bus
problem') 
==>  basically if you have the right keyboard you'll be able to type the
right name and get through
==>  if you are using a different keyboard and the registrant has
activated all the different forms of a domain name, you'll get though 
==>  if you are using a different keyboard and the registrant has not
activated all the different forms of the domain name, you won't get
through 
which is somehow ok as I think we should still bear in mind that if we
speak the same language I will give you my IDN address if we don't speak
the same language then we have to find some other way to communicate which
may still be my ASCII address ..
 
so the point is: confusingly similar characters are problematic, should be
investigated thoroughly, should be somehow made available and posted
publicly, should ultimately have some guidelines (enforced) on how they
should be handled .. but again I don't see this as a pressing requirement
at this stage ..
 
b)   An objection procedure
If we agree that:
-       It's a fast track process
-       Each country has the right to choose the string/name that
represents its IDN ccTLD
-       Fast Track deals only with non-contentious strings/names
-       Fast Track deals only with non-contentious applications
-       Fast Track accepts only strings/names agreed on by all 3:
Government, current registry and local community
-       Fast Track approves only strings/names approved by the technical
committee 
-       Fast Track approves only strings/names confirmed by the linguistic
committee 
Then I don't think there is still need for more confirmations or approvals
before a string is delegated 
 
c)   Agreement between ccTLD manager and ICANN
-       With full support to the valid reasons behind the agreements, this
should not be considered a condition for IDN ccTLD delegation
 
N.B.: will make sure this reaches the GAC mailing list and RAM Mohan but
I'm not sure I have access to IDNC WG mailing list ..
 
Kind Regards
Manal