[gnso-sl-wg] RE: Reserved Names WG - Single and Two Character Labels
As discussed on todayâs call, below is a copy of the correspondence with Ram on the single and two character IDN recommendations. Patrick _____ From: Ram Mohan [mailto:rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 9:54 AM To: 'Patrick Jones' Cc: 'Gomes, Chuck' Subject: RE: Reserved Names WG - Single and Two Character Labels Patrick, Given that no ISO-3166 equivalent exists I think weâll have a problem implementing what you suggest below. The original recommendation is not a bad one, but its practical impact will be to limit registrations at 1 and 2 characters at both the top and 2nd levels. As a registry operator, that is the kind of rule I would implement if this recommendation was adopted in the INFO domain. -ram _____ From: Patrick Jones [mailto:patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:40 PM To: rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: 'Gomes, Chuck' Subject: RE: Reserved Names WG - Single and Two Character Labels Thanks, your advice is very helpful. The additional language was not included in the recommendation. It was considered, but not adopted. The subgroup will discuss the points you raise on the call today. One final question â do you see any problems with not reserving single and two character IDNs at the second level? We could consider permitting their registration at the second level in the same manner as two letter names (avoid ISO 3166 list but permit registration provided registry implements measures to avoid confusion with any corresponding country codes). Patrick _____ From: Ram Mohan [mailto:rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 9:26 AM To: 'Patrick Jones' Cc: 'Gomes, Chuck' Subject: RE: Reserved Names WG - Single and Two Character Labels Patrick, This addition, although technically sound, is operationally a nightmare for registries and registrars. The original recommendation is OK as long as the group realizes it is effectively recommending blocking 1-2 character registrations anyway, pending policy development. -ram -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ram Mohan e: <mailto:rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx | m: +1.215.431.0958 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- _____ From: Patrick Jones [mailto:patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:06 PM To: rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: 'Gomes, Chuck' Subject: RE: Reserved Names WG - Single and Two Character Labels I see now. We have struggled with a manageable approach for single and two character IDNs at the second level. Our initial thoughts, considering the comments made in Lisbon, the IDN WG Outcomes Report and other materials, has been to not restrict them. But we know some scripts may raise user confusion issues. We also considered adding the following: âIF single character ASCII strings are reserved for registration at top and second level THEN all U-labels that consist of a character corresponding to a single code point that cannot be decomposed into a series of code points OR that does not represent a word, phrase or concept MUST also be reserved.â Additional thoughts would be much appreciated. Patrick _____ From: Ram Mohan [mailto:rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:52 AM To: 'Patrick Jones' Cc: 'Gomes, Chuck' Subject: RE: Reserved Names WG - Single and Two Character Labels Patrick, Your response misses the point that 2nd level registration evaluations are outside of the application for new gTLDs. -ram _____ From: Patrick Jones [mailto:patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 11:29 AM To: rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: 'Gomes, Chuck' Subject: RE: Reserved Names WG - Single and Two Character Labels Thanks Ram, The subgroup will discuss this today. The recommendation to examine IDN strings on a case by case basis will occur within the context of the examination of TLD strings as a whole. Our recommendation is to focus the examination on the script and language applied for. The review will occur within the review of all applications for new gTLDs. Patrick _____ From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 7:55 AM To: rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Patrick Jones Subject: RE: Reserved Names WG - Single and Two Character Labels Thanks Ram. I am sure the subgroup will discuss this in their meeting today. Chuck Gomes "This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify sender immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission." _____ From: Ram Mohan [mailto:rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 10:50 AM To: 'Patrick Jones' Cc: Gomes, Chuck; rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: Reserved Names WG - Single and Two Character Labels Patrick, Thanks for this note. There is no technical or IDN issue with this recommendation. I would like to point out that the recommendation that all one and two character IDN strings must be allocated on a case-by-case basis opens up a new set of issues with regard to: - Who will review these applications and decide to issue the names or not - What is the timeframe for such applications to be processed If this recommendation is implemented, then the RN-WG needs to be aware that they are effectively âblockingâ one and two character IDN registrations pending the creation of a review and allocation process. I assume that the WG is aware and OK with this track. Iâm ccâing Chuck on this mail for efficiency. -ram -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ram Mohan e: <mailto:rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx | m: +1.215.431.0958 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- _____ From: Patrick Jones [mailto:patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 11:28 PM To: rmohan@xxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Reserved Names WG - Single and Two Character Labels Ram, The Reserved Names Working Group, subgroup on single and two character labels, is completing its portion of the working group report tomorrow. Chuck asked that I confirm with IDN experts on the recommendations related to single and two character IDNs. Attached below is a copy of the section. I have also provided a link to the latest draft of the subgroup report. Please note that Cary and Tina provided substantial input and language for this section. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Our final subgroup call is tomorrow at 1:30 Pacific. I apologize for the late request. http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-sl-wg/msg00071.html. 1. 1.2 RECOMMENDATION TWO: SINGLE AND TWO CHARACTER IDNs 2. Single and two-character U-labels on the top level and second level of a domain name should not be restricted in general. Instead, requested strings should be analyzed on a case by case basis depending on the script and language used in order to determine whether the string should be granted for allocation in the DNS. This is notwithstanding the rule that the ISO-3166 list will continue to be reserved and as such all two character ASCII strings (i.e. LDH-labels) will remain to be reserved at the top level and second level of a domain name, although registries may propose release of two character strings at the second level provided that measures to avoid confusion with any corresponding country codes are implemented. Minority Statement from Mike Rodenbaugh: âI recommend that single and two IDN character names continue to be released at the second level in future TLDs in accord with ICANN IDN Guidelines, as they have already been released in existing TLDs.â Rationale In a resolution approved by the ICANN Board on 25 September 2000, the Board recognized âit is important that the Internet evolve to be more accessible to those who do not use the ASCII character setâ but stressed that âthe internationalization of the Internetâs domain name system must be accomplished through standards that are open, non-proprietary, and fully compatible with the Internet's existing end-to-end model and that preserve globally unique naming in a universally resolvable public name space.â Once ICANN opens the process for new TLD applications, it is expected that many of those applications may be for IDNs. In some scripts, such as Chinese, Japanese and Korean, single and two characters frequently translate into words, concepts or phrases. Because of this, it is not advisable to maintain the existing reservation against single and two-character U-Label strings for IDNs. Applications should be reviewed on a script by script basis. As examples, single and two character IDNs currently exist as second and third level domain names in both ccTLDs and gTLDs. http:// <http://china.icom.museum/> äå.icom.museum directs visitors to http://china.icom.museum/. http:// <http://korea.icom.museum/> íê.icom.museum directs visitors to http://www.icomkorea.org/board/index2.php. The GAC Communique released in Lisbon, Portugal acknowledged the joint GAC-ccNSO-GNSO IDN Working Group, and noted of a draft issue paper on the selection of IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO-3166 list. The GAC is continuing to work with the ccNSO on this issue, because in many languages and scripts country names cannot be abbreviated, and it may be difficult to assign internationalized versions of the ISO-3166 list. The GAC is continuing to develop guidance on IDN TLDs that will be incorporated into the new gTLD process. While not specifically written for IDNs, the GAC Principles on New gTLDs released in Lisbon contain a number of recommendations relevant to single and two character IDNs: 1.1 A gTLD is a top level domain which is not based on the ISO 3166 two-letter country code list. For the purposes and scope of this document, new gTLDs are defined as any gTLDs added to the Top Level Domain space after the date of the adoption of these principles by the GAC. 2.4 In the interests of consumer confidence and security, new gTLDs should not be confusingly similar to existing gTLDs. To avoid confusion with country-code Top Level Domains no two letter gTLDs should be introduced. The GAC Principles do not address single and two character labels in IDNs. The GNSO IDN Working Group (IDN WG) Report (http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/idn-wg-fr-22mar07.htm) provides some guidance on single and two character IDNs. The IDN WG found broad agreement in: 4.1.3, Language Community Input for Evaluation of New gTLD Strings 4.1.5, Limit Variant Confusion and Collision 4.1.6, Limit Confusingly Similar Strings The IDN WG found support in: 4.2.9, Support for a countryâs rights to define/reserve IDN strings for the country name 4.2.22, Support for regarding âconfusingly similarâ as âvisually confusingly similarâ or âtypographically confusingly similarâ 4.2.23, Support for IDN considerations for extension of reserved names list, possibly by introducing the notion of âreserved conceptsâ (for example; the concept of âexampleâ as expressed in other languages/scripts) The IDN WG and GAC Principles recognize that there may be issues of user confusion related to the introduction of IDNs at the top level. ICANN should be concerned about the potential for user confusion in scripts that share similarities, such as confusion between single and two character labels in Cyrillic, Greek and Latin scripts, or confusion between Chinese, Japanese and Korean scripts that share characters, or Farsi and Arabic, etc. Previous ICANN Board resolutions on IDNs also provide guidance to the Reserved Names Working Group on single and two character labels in IDNs. On 27 March 2003, the ICANN Board endorsed the IDN Implementation approach in the Guidelines for the Implementation of Internationalized Domain Names (http://www.icann.org/minutes/minutes-27mar03.htm). On 18 February 2004, the Board adopted a resolution to permit VeriSign and Public Interest Registry to begin testbed registration of IDNs in the .COM, .NET and .ORG gTLDs. On 8 December 2006, the ICANN Board issued a detailed resolution on IDNs (http://www.icann.org/minutes/minutes-08dec06.htm). The Board requested âthe ccNSO and the GAC, through a joint collaborative effort, in consultation as needed with the relevant technical community, to produce an issues paper relating to the selection of IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes.â Additional examples of existing registrations of single and two character IDNs at the second level include: U-label: å.biz A-label: xn--w6q.biz Translation: Japanese Yen Pronunciation (Romanji): en Script: Han U-label: é.biz A-label: xn--yi7a.biz Translation: Dragon Pronunciation (Mandarin): long2 Script: Han U-label: äæ.biz A-label: xn--vuq861b.biz Translation: information Pronunciation (Mandarin): xin4 xi2 Script: Han U-label: ãã.biz A-label: xn--tdkub.biz Translation: "love" transliterated into Japanese Pronunciation (Romanji): rabu Script: Katakana U-label: ãã.biz A-label: xn--68jd.biz Translation: sushi Pronunciation: sushi Script: Hiragana U-label: åå.biz A-label: xn--sprr0q.biz Translation: sushi Pronunciation: sushi Script: Han [Examples provided by William Tan at NeuStar, http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-sl-wg/msg00019.html.] On 28 March 2007, during the ICANN meeting in Lisbon, Portugal, the GAC-ccNSO-GNSO joint working group on IDNs held a workshop focusing on policy issues related to the introduction of IDNs at the top level (http://www.icann.org/meetings/lisbon/agenda-idn-wg-28mar07.htm). A transcript from the workshop is available at http://www.icann.org/meetings/lisbon/transcript-idn-wg-28mar07.htm. This session generated good discussion on issues related to implementation of IDN, including single and two character labels in IDNs. On 16 April 2007, the GAC and GNSO had a telephone conference to discuss IDN issues within the context of the GAC Principles on New gTLDs. As part of this discussion, GAC members were asked about single and two character IDNs. Cary Karp asked a question âabout scripts where the concept of letter is irrelevant, such as two Chinese ideograms.â Bill Dee, the EU representative on the GAC, stated âI think that is something we need to cover when we come with our IDN Principles, but we need to discuss it within the GAC first. So this is really useful that you have raised this. You have started a train of thought that we are going to have to pursue, obviously.â Based on the 16 April 2007 conference call, the GAC is likely to provide further guidance to ICANN on single and two character labels in IDNs as part of the GAC Principles on IDNs. The GAC may benefit from the consideration of single and two character labels by the Reserved Names Working Group. 3. Consultations with experts A number of consultations have occurred with IDN experts, linguistic experts, and members of the Subgroup, the full RN Working Group and with members of the GNSO IDN Working Group. The full RN Working Group had a conference call with Cary Karp and Ram Mohan on 1 March 2007. Several discussions occurred on IDN implications for Reserved Names during the ICANN meeting in Lisbon, Portugal. The GAC and GNSO discussed IDN issues as part of the discussion of the GAC Principles on New gTLDs on 16 April 2007. Extensive consultation has occurred with Cary Karp and Tina Dam in the consideration of single and two character labels in IDNs. Consultations on definition of character Consultations occurred with Michael Everson, Tina Dam, Cary Karp, and Chuck Gomes. Cary Karp and Tina Dam provided extensive analysis of the draft definition and examples. According to a 26 April 2006 email from Cary Karp, âDigits are also characters, but the status of what an anglophone would regard as diacritical marks, is far less clear in other contexts where what is sometimes term âdecorationâ is added to âbaseâ characters. Graphic symbols such as punctuation marks may also be termed characters, and the status of other graphic devices such as dingbats and smiley faces can also be argued.â Patrick L. Jones Registry Liaison Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 Tel: +1 310 301 3861 Fax: +1 310 823 8649 _____ _____  ICANN Board Resolutions 00.77-00.80, 25 September 2000, http://www.icann.org/minutes/minutes-25sep00.htm.  GAC Principles on New gTLDs (28 March 2007), http://gac.icann.org/web/communiques/gac27com.pdf.  A recording of the 16 April 2007 GAC-GNSO conference call is available at http://gnso-audio.icann.org/gtld-gac-20070416.mp3.