RE: [gnso-idng] RE: same string registered at 2nd level across different IDN gTLDs [RE: [gnso-idng] rethinking IDN gTLDs]

[Adrian Kinderis <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

'this' group or 'a' group?

Adrian Kinderis
Chief Executive Officer
AusRegistry Pty Ltd
Level 8, 10 Queens Road
Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004
Ph: +61 3 9866 3710
Fax: +61 3 9866 1970
Email: adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Web: www.ausregistry.com.au

The information contained in this communication is intended for the named 
recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain legally privileged 
and confidential information and if you are not an intended recipient you must 
not use, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have 
received this communication in error, please delete all copies from your system 
and notify us immediately.



-----Original Message-----
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, 3 December 2009 4:48 PM
To: Adrian Kinderis; Edmon Chung; gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-idng] RE: same string registered at 2nd level across 
different IDN gTLDs [RE: [gnso-idng] rethinking IDN gTLDs]

Yes Adrian.  The first step though in my opinion is to decide whether this 
group is interested in working on this issue.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Kinderis [mailto:adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 12:39 AM
> To: Gomes, Chuck; Edmon Chung; gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-idng] RE: same string registered at 2nd 
> level across different IDN gTLDs [RE: [gnso-idng] rethinking 
> IDN gTLDs]
> 
> So, it could be this group but should the fact that you are 
> changing tack be advertised to the Council?
> 
> As I said the conversation seems fruitful but it is not where 
> you started with your original charter. The current 
> discussions may attract interested parties.
> 
> My two cents plus GST.
> 
> Adrian Kinderis
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, 3 December 2009 4:27 PM
> To: Adrian Kinderis; Edmon Chung; gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-idng] RE: same string registered at 2nd 
> level across different IDN gTLDs [RE: [gnso-idng] rethinking 
> IDN gTLDs]
> 
> Adrian,
> 
> Did I understand you previously that you are opposed to 
> talking about possible expedition of IDN gTLDs, which I 
> believe was the original purpose of this group?  If so, are 
> you suggesting that this group be disbanded?
> 
> I personally think that it would be better for a small group 
> to develop a white paper or recommendation paper before 
> starting discussion at the Council level.  I think it is much 
> more effective that way. Whether it should be this group or 
> not is a question that was asked in today's call. I for one, 
> am okay with that.
> 
> Chuck 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 11:30 PM
> > To: Edmon Chung; gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [gnso-idng] RE: same string registered at 2nd level across 
> > different IDN gTLDs [RE: [gnso-idng] rethinking IDN gTLDs]
> > 
> > 
> > All good conversation folks but sorry to play devil's advocate but 
> > this seems far removed from the charter that this group was 
> originally 
> > established for.
> > 
> > I don't want to sound grumpy but whilst the conversation is healthy 
> > perhaps it needs to be on a different list (i.e. the council list?)
> > 
> > Adrian Kinderis
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Edmon Chung
> > Sent: Thursday, 3 December 2009 3:19 PM
> > To: gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: same string registered at 2nd level across 
> different IDN 
> > gTLDs [RE: [gnso-idng] rethinking IDN gTLDs]
> > 
> > 
> > And for DotAsia, barring the costs of ICANN fees (which 
> could make it 
> > prohibitive) our hope is to offer the IDN versions 
> automatically and 
> > at no extra cost to registrants.  That has consistently 
> been what our 
> > community had asked us to do (and in fact how .CN and .TW 
> implements 
> > it in their respective IDN TLD testbeds).
> > Edmon
> > 
> > 
> > PS. Since Israel is part of Asia, Hebrew is part of the 
> > consideration for .ASIA :-)... on a separate note, could you 
> > point me to any Hebrew IDN Language policy development 
> > group... would like to get in touch.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx 
> > [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> > > Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2009 11:29 AM
> > > To: Gomes, Chuck; Avri Doria; gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: RE: same string registered at 2nd level across 
> > different IDN gTLDs [RE:
> > > [gnso-idng] rethinking IDN gTLDs]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I should point out that you only activate a second level 
> > registration 
> > > in the Hebrew version of .com if we are offering the Hebrew 
> > version.  
> > > It will not be possible to introduce all possible scripts 
> > for .com at once, especially at $185,000+ a pop.
> > > 
> > > Chuck
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > > > [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 10:20 PM
> > > > To: Avri Doria; gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: RE: same string registered at 2nd level across 
> different 
> > > > IDN gTLDs [RE: [gnso-idng] rethinking IDN gTLDs]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yes Avri.  Just one clarification though.  As the registrant of 
> > > > ella.com you would be the only one that we would allow to 
> > activate 
> > > > ella.Hebrew_TLD-of-dotcom but we would not 
> automatically activate 
> > > > it.  If you wanted ella-in Hebrew.com or 
> > ella-in-Hebrew.Hebrew_TLD 
> > > > of dotcom you would need to register one of those if 
> you had not 
> > > > already registered ella-in-hebrew.com.
> > > >
> > > > Chuck
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > > > > [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 6:11 PM
> > > > > To: gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: Re: same string registered at 2nd level across
> > > > different IDN
> > > > > gTLDs [RE: [gnso-idng] rethinking IDN gTLDs]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chuck is this the same for you?
> > > > >
> > > > > Eric, I did not think this was what you said.
> > > > >
> > > > > a.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2 Dec 2009, at 23:52, Edmon Chung wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Avri,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is really quite simple:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IF you have "ella.com"
> > > > > > THEN you can have
> > > > > "ella.<COM_in_other_language_also_operated_by_Verisign>"
> > > > > > You do NOT get a translation of "ella" in ".com"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Based on your example:
> > > > > >> I have ella.com
> > > > > >> would i get ella.Hebrew_TLD-of-dotcom ===> YES would i
> > > > > have אלה.com
> > > > > >> ===> NO or is that אללה.com ===> NO or maybe even
> > > > אלילה.com ===> NO
> > > > > > (unless of course you registered them separately)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Because I am not sure what ".com" would be in different
> > > > > languages, I will turn back to my .asia example for the 
> > following
> > > > > explanation:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IF you have "ella.asia"
> > > > > > THEN you (and only you) can have
> > > > > "ella.<Asia_in_other_language_also_operated_by_DotAsia>"
> > > > > > i.e.:
> > > > > > ella.亚洲 ===(Asia in Chinese)
> > > > > > ella.アジア ===(Asia in Japanese)
> > > > > > ella.아시아 ===(Asia in Korean)
> > > > > > ella.เอเซีย ===(Asia in Thai)
> > > > > > ella.एशिया ===(Asia in Hindi)
> > > > > > ...etc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IF you want "אלה.asia" it will be a different
> > > > registration.  As you
> > > > > > correctly pointed out, it is non-unique if you try
> > > > > translations.  Also
> > > > > > an important point is that this is no different than what 
> > > > > > happens today, so there would be no user confusion 
> > (or as chuck
> > > > > corrected to
> > > > > > say user confusion would be minimized... because it would
> > > > provide a
> > > > > > consistent experience)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Whether:
> > > > > > אלה.asia == אללה.asia == אלילה.asia
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is a matter of the IDN Language policy for Hebrew under
> > > > > .ASIA (which in fact we are trying to develop right now for
> > > > our launch
> > > > > and you are certainly welcome to provide suggestions :-))
> > > > when ".ASIA"
> > > > > launches Hebrew registrations.
> > > > > IF they are to be considered the same by registration 
> > policies, it 
> > > > > would be applied to all 
> > > > > <.ASIA_in_different_langauge_also_operated_by_DotAsia>.
> > > > That is what
> > > > > we mean by offering the same string for registration 
> > only to the 
> > > > > current registrant.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Edmon
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PS. I am not sure others did not get it... at least I think
> > > > > Stephane got it... but I may be wrong...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > > > >> From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > > > > [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On
> > > > > >> Behalf Of Avri Doria
> > > > > >> Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2009 4:53 AM
> > > > > >> To: gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > > > > >> Subject: Re: [gnso-idng] rethinking IDN gTLDs
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On 2 Dec 2009, at 14:27, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> Avri,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> If I understand you correctly, your conclusion is not
> > > > > correct.  FCFS
> > > > > >>> will only
> > > > > >> apply (for LDH or IDN) if the exact second-level 
> > domain is not 
> > > > > >> already registered as a second-level domain name in the
> > > > > applicable TLD (LDH or IDN).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On 2 Dec 2009, at 15:14, Edmon Chung wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> Edmon: I think Avri you probably mistook the idea... I
> > > > think what
> > > > > >>> Chuck and I were talking about is NOT about 
> > translation at the 
> > > > > >>> second level.  But offering the same string to the same
> > > > > registrant
> > > > > >>> under an IDN TLD.  More specifically, for example, a
> > > > > registrant of
> > > > > >>> "computer.asia" will be offered "computer.???" 
> > (where "???" is 
> > > > > >>> "Asia" in Japanese), OR a registrant for 
> > "???????.asia" (where 
> > > > > >>> "???????" means "Internet" in Japanese) will be offered
> > > > > "???????.???".  There is no translation involved.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Pardon me, but i remain confused:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> concrete example/question
> > > > > >> (ps we beter develop a way of talking about this 
> that is not 
> > > > > >> confusing.  if we who supposedl understand at least
> > > > > somewhat of what
> > > > > >> is going on can't communicate, opps, we have trouble.)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I have ella.com and i might like to have it in Hebrew.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> would i get ella.Hebrew_TLD-of-dotcom
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> or would i have אלה.com
> > > > > >> or is that אללה.com
> > > > > >> or maybe even אלילה.com
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> (viable transliterations ad translations)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> If we are talking about a translation or 
> > transliteration then I 
> > > > > >> remian confused as to how one does it.  If you talking
> > > > about just
> > > > > >> giving me the LDH with a IDN-tld, ok, i understand.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> a.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
>