RE: [gnso-idng] reporting back to the council
- To: "'Avri Doria'" <avri@xxxxxxx>, <gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-idng] reporting back to the council
- From: "Edmon Chung" <edmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:57:34 +0800
If you look at the document, it simply describes the problem and leave
further action to the council.
As suggested, and as you pointed out, I also do not think we arrived at much
consensus except for identifying the problem of applying for confusingly
similar TLD strings. Which was what I am suggesting we report back to the
council. No suggestion or charter for working group was included.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On
> Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 11:33 AM
> To: gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-idng] reporting back to the council
> I would not feel we had consensus on this.
> This was just a Drafting team, and we never even came to agreement on a
> for a working group let alone a policy change to the DAG. This group
> stalled because there was no consensus among the few people participating.
> While there might be agreement on their being a possible problem, there
> agreement on what to do about it, or even on whether anything should be
> about it.
> On 13 Apr 2010, at 21:53, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
> > Thanks Edmon. I am good with the draft, but wonder if we have consensus
> one step further and make a recommendation to Council, asking Council to
> Staff to revise the DAG to clarify that multiple 'confusingly similar'
> the same applicant would not contend with one another. I support that
> recommendation, and wonder whether there is any opposition in this group?
> > Best,
> > Mike
> > Mike Rodenbaugh
> > RODENBAUGH LAW
> > tel/fax: +1 (415) 738-8087
> > http://rodenbaugh.com
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Edmon Chung
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 12:10 AM
> > To: gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [gnso-idng] reporting back to the council
> > Hi Everyone,
> > Given no further discussions on the 2 topics that were identified:
> > 1. Application of confusingly similar TLD strings
> > - there seems to be enough agreement around this topic in general
> > - also attached clean version of the document
> > 2. Process for the application of IDN gTLDs, including those identified
> > - there continues to be push back against having any dedicated
> handle special case IDN TLD applications
> > And given that it seems any further discussion would require the GNSO
> consider whether an actual working group should be formed for further work
on 1 (if
> any) unless there is any particular objection, I will report the above
back to the
> > Edmon
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.801 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2807 - Release Date: 04/14/10