[gnso-sl-wg] RE: Reserved Names WG - Single and Two Character Labels

["Patrick Jones" <patrick.jones@xxxxxxxxx>]

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[1]

 

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:[2]

 

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.[3] 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

 

  _____  


  _____  

[1] ICANN Board Resolutions 00.77-00.80, 25 September 2000, 
http://www.icann.org/minutes/minutes-25sep00.htm. 

[2] GAC Principles on New gTLDs (28 March 2007), 
http://gac.icann.org/web/communiques/gac27com.pdf. 

[3] A recording of the 16 April 2007 GAC-GNSO conference call is available at 
http://gnso-audio.icann.org/gtld-gac-20070416.mp3.