RE: RE: [ccnso-idncctld] Edits to Principle E

["Edmon Chung" <edmon@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

It should have said "relevant stakeholders within the territory".  The
wording was taken directly from the current wording.

 

So:

 

======================================

 

Delegation of an IDN ccTLD should only be possible in the Fast Track where
the designation of the selected delegate is non-contentious within the
territory. This should be evidenced by the support/endorsement of the
relevant stakeholders in the territory for the selected delegate. The IDN
ccTLD string proposed should be non-contentious within the territory, and
should be non-contentious for the security and stability of the Internet.
This should be evidenced by the support/endorsement of the relevant
stakeholders within the territory that the selected string is a meaningful
representation of the name of the territory and that the security and the
stability for the Internet community is maintained.

 

======================================

 

Again, I do not think anyone is suggesting that the 2 committees cannot do
the job, but that is the suggested process.  We should, in our guiding
principles specify the importance of maintaining the security and stability
of the Internet.  That is a critical criteria as setup in the IDNC WG
Charter.

 

The reason I think it works well within this principle is because the TLD
string is an important consideration of the issue, also, it fits best within
this principle rather than the others.

 

I would be quite surprised if we cannot agree to add this as a guiding
principle.

 

Edmon

 

 

 

 

From: Young Eum Lee [mailto:yesunny@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 12:17 AM
To: Manal Ismail
Cc: Edmon Chung; ccnso-idncctld@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: RE: [ccnso-idncctld] Edits to Principle E

 

I agree with Manal's opinion that Principle E is not the appropriate section
to be mentioning the stability and security issue. 

Although I think that the stability and security of the Internet is a
'given' premise and need not be specifically mentioned as a 'guiding
principle,' if some people would like to see these words mentioned, we may
include these phrases as the basic reasons for establishing these committees
in the 'Basic Premises' section of the Step 2 of Stage 2: Due Diligence.

 

Stage 2: Due Diligence

Step 1. Submission of....

"Therefore an external and independent  ?Technical Committee ? and ?Language
Expert Advisory Panel (LEAP)? should be appointed to conduct the due
diligence and report to the Board."

--> YE Suggestion: Therefore, in order to ensure the  stability and security
of the Internet, external and independent  ?Technical Committee ? and
?Language Expert Advisory Panel (LEAP)? should be appointed to conduct the
due diligence and report to the Board

- YE

  _____  

????: Manal Ismail [manal@xxxxxxxxxx]
????: Edmon Chung [edmon@xxxxxxxxxxx],ccnso-idncctld@xxxxxxxxx
? ?: 2008? 6? 12?(?) 23:19:11
? ?: RE: [ccnso-idncctld] Edits to Principle E

  
Dear Edmon .. 
Dear Colleagues .. 

I'm afraid I can't agree to the below suggested edits .. 
If both committees (technical and linguistic) are not sufficient to address
and maintain security and stability requirements then we must think of a
third commitee to do so .. I agree with you on the importance of the topic
and think we cannot leave this simply to voluntary comments by unidentified
stakeholders .. 

This is of course in addition to to my complete objection to the following
part: 
"This should be evidenced by the support/endorsement of the relevant
stakeholders that the selected string is a meaningful representation of the
name of the territory and that the security and the stability for the
Internet community is maintained." 

which indicates that 'relevant stakeholders'!! should support that the
selected string is a meaningful representation of the name of the territoty.


Kind Regards 
Manal 

________________________________ 

From: owner-ccnso-idncctld@xxxxxxxxx on behalf of Edmon Chung 
Sent: Thu 12/06/2008 11:07 AM 
To: ccnso-idncctld@xxxxxxxxx 
Subject: [ccnso-idncctld] Edits to Principle E 




Hi everyone, 

To avoid the confusion from my more lengthy email previously, please find my

suggested edits to Principle E: 

-------------------------------------------- 

E. The IDN ccTLD for Fast Track should be non-contentious within the 
territory. 

Delegation of an IDN ccTLD should only be possible in the Fast Track where 
the designation of the selected delegate is non-contentious within the 
territory. This should be evidenced by the support/endorsement of the 
relevant stakeholders in the territory for the selected delegate. The IDN 
ccTLD string proposed should be non-contentious within the territory, and 
should be non-contentious for the security and stability of the Internet. 
This should be evidenced by the support/endorsement of the relevant 
stakeholders that the selected string is a meaningful representation of the 
name of the territory and that the security and the stability for the 
Internet community is maintained. 

-------------------------------------------- 

I think it is very important that we address the issue of maintaining the 
security and stability in our "guiding principles" section. Right now none 
of the principles address that point. Even though further in our process, 
we have addressed it with the 2 committees, it is I think important that we 
address the issue as a guiding principle. 

What the above also does is decouple the delegation of a Fast Track IDN 
ccTLD and the selection of the IDN ccTLD string for the Fast Track. I 
personally believe they are 2 distinct things even though could be done in 
parallel. 

If there is no objection to the above, I would like to update the current 
wording to show our commitment to maintaining the security and stability of 
the Internet along with non-contentiousness, which are both, in my mind, 
pillar criteria as laid out in the IDNC WG charter. 

Edmon 





Young Eum Lee

Department of Media Arts and Sciences

Korea National Open University

http://www.knou.ac.kr/~yesunny

yesunny@xxxxxxxxxx

(82) 11-9895-5499


Image removed by sender.

Image removed by sender.