[ssac-gnso-irdwg] Version 2 of the Draft Final Report
Dear IRD-WG, Thank you all for the latest round of feedback as well as detailed discussions on the phone calls, attached please find a revised version of the draft final report as well as a redline version (as compared with version 1). Changes from version 1 are: - reworded recommendations as discussed on the phone call. - cleaned up the document - addressed most of Avri’s comments - revised the translation and transliteration section. - provided more text on section 3.4. - added some text about transcription, along with translation and transliteration. At the direction of the chairs, this document is now in last call status, WG members are encouraged to provide comments by close of business September 27 everywhere. Also as agreed two calls ago, I have circulated this report to IETF IDN expert John Klensin for his comments. Finally, on the last phone call, there are two issues raised: 1) whether to add some text about transcription. - I think Jim and Avri think this should be added. I have also recommended this to make the document technically correct. If others have a different opinion, would encourage you to raise it now. 2) whether to include texts on variants, Edmon suggested yes and to include the following text (from interim report), but would need more opinion from the WG, is there any support or objection to include the following text from the interim report into section 4.2 under domain names? Your opinion is greatly appreciated: The IRD-WG members discussed the issue of how to query and display variants extensively. They provide the following observations: · There is no uniform definition of variant. Different organizations and different countries define it differently. However, in general, variants can be categorized as activated variants and reserved variants. Activated variants are variants of a domain name that are put in the corresponding DNS zone file, thus resolvable through normal DNS lookups. Reserved variants are variants reserved for a specific domain name and cannot be registered, but are otherwise not in the DNS zone file. • IRD-WG members noted that it is outside the scope of the IRD-WG to define variants or discuss how different languages handle variants. Rather, the IRD-WG use the categories as they are generallly defined (activated vs. reserved). • The IRD-WG members agree that a Whois service query of an activated variant should return the domain of which it is a variant in its response, as well as an indication that the label queried is a variant of the original domain. The IRD-WG members agree that this should be consistent across Whois services. • The IRD-WG members also agree that defining a Whois service query of a reserved variant returns is a matter of local policy. The IRD-WG has identified two options: A query of a reserved variant for XYZ domain should return a message saying that this variant is a reserved variant of XYZ domain or (alternatively) a query of a reserved variant should return the same information as the query for an activated variant. The WG further agreed that having the Whois service response provide a link to the registrar/registries’ variant policy would be helpful. Kind regards, Steve On 9/8/11 11:13 PM, "Steve Sheng" <steve.sheng@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: Dear IRD-WG, Thanks for those who have provided comments to this report, attached please find version 1 of the draft final report. (apologies for sending it late). Changes from version 0: - reorganize the findings section to make it flow better - added additional discussions about translation and transliteration. - added text where necessary. - addressed some editor notes. For your reference, I have also included a redline version compared with version 00. Kind regards, Steve Attachment:
binSfEpXxbEvN.bin Attachment:
September 20 IRD Report v2.doc Attachment:
V2 IRD Redline.doc
|