Re: [ssac-gnso-irdwg] Update: Final Report of the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group

[Steve Sheng <steve.sheng@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thank you Scott and Robert for voicing support to the proposed changes by the 
SSAC. Are there any differing opinions in the WG?

Also thanks to  Robert for your excellent question on formats, I have checked 
with the relevant RFCs and standards, and propose the following revision to 
your clarification:

Telephone/fax- ITU-T E.123 [(+12 234 223 2235)international form only];
Email- IETF EAI WG RFCs; RFC 6531
Registration Status- Exact EPP status where applicable;
Dates and Time- ISO 8601-2004 [Date form YYYYDDD only.  Time form HHMMSS only].
Date and time in UTC as specified in [RFC3339], with no offset from the zero 
meridian.

Rationale:

For email, IETF EAI WG already produced RFCs, they are RFC 6530, 6531, 6532 and 
6533. The email address syntax is specified in RFC 6531, and the actual UTF8 
encoding definition is in RFC 6532.

For Date and Time, your suggestion is fine, but we may also want to make sure 
there is no ambiguity with regards to timezones, so using RFC 3339 as a basis 
(which adopts ISO 8601-2004 and also defines a display format) and then specify 
no offset from the zero meridian would be good. It is a format that some gTLD 
registries already use today, and a requirement for new gTLD WHOIS.

Kind regards,
Steve

From: "Robert C. Hutchinson" <rchutch@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:rchutch@xxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2012 16:05:59 -0700
To: Scott Austin <saustin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:saustin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: Steve Sheng <steve.sheng@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:steve.sheng@xxxxxxxxx>>, 
"ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx>" 
<ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Re: [ssac-gnso-irdwg] Update: Final Report of the Internationalized 
Registration Data Working Group

Hi Steve - I support making the data forms recommended in the report into a 
separate summary recommendation as you noted -
.....
Telephone/fax- ITU-T E.123; Email- IETF EAI WG RFCs; Registration Status- Exact 
EPP status where applicable; Dates - ISO 8601-2004.
.....

The standards referenced include multiple formats which if implemented 
differently by each registry will make common whois readers unnecessarily 
difficult.  We did not discuss this, but it is noted in the text of the report 
that for example; ITU E.123 should use the international form for telephone 
numbers [not the local form].  Additionally -- the ISO standard for dates 
includes many forms - we should pick one.  I would recommend explicitly stating 
dates should be represented in the YYYYDDD "ordinal" form ONLY.  Also - since 
time may be important to some registrations - I recommend picking the HHMMSS 
time format [optional].

So I would recommends we change the text as proposed to:

Telephone/fax- ITU-T E.123 [(+12 234 223 2235)international form only];
Email- IETF EAI WG RFCs;
Registration Status- Exact EPP status where applicable;
Dates and Time- ISO 8601-2004 [Date form YYYYDDD only.  Time form HHMMSS only].

Best Regards,

Bob Hutchinson


On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Scott Austin 
<saustin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:saustin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

This substantive change appears appropriate and I would support its adoption 
and inclusion in an amendment to our Final Report.

Scott Austin
[http://www.gordonrees.com/images/gordonrees_emailLogoLeft.jpg] 
[http://www.gordonrees.com/images/gordonrees_emailLogoright.jpg]
Scott R. Austin
Partner
saustin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:saustin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
vCard<http://www.gordonrees.com/vcards/saustin.vcf> |  My 
Bio<http://www.gordonrees.com/atty/atty_bio_template.cfm?attyid=saustin>

200 S. Biscayne Blvd, Suite 4300
Miami, FL 33131
Main Phone: (305) 668-4433<tel:%28305%29%20668-4433>
Mobile: (216) 870-7954<tel:%28216%29%20870-7954>
Direct Fax: (877) 644-6207<tel:%28877%29%20644-6207>

www.gordonrees.com<http://www.gordonrees.com/>

National Offices:
California
New York
Texas
Illinois
Nevada
Arizona
Colorado
Washington
Oregon
New Jersey
Florida
Georgia<http://www.gordonrees.com/offices/index.cfm>

P Please consider the environment before printing this email.

________________________________
From: owner-ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx> 
[mailto:owner-ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:owner-ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx>]
 On Behalf Of Steve Sheng
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 5:57 PM
To: ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:ssac-gnso-irdwg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ssac-gnso-irdwg] Update: Final Report of the Internationalized 
Registration Data Working Group

Dear members of IRD-WG,

  Greetings. When the IRD-WG Final report was approved by the group in March. 
It was sent to GNSO and to SSAC for review  and approval. As a result, the SSAC 
provided a few comments, for your review and approval.

  Most of these comments are to correct technical and other errors in the 
document. The only substantive change is that the SSAC proposed an additional 
recommendation:


Recommendation 4: ICANN should take appropriate steps to require gTLD 
registries and registrars andpersuade ccTLD registries and registrars to 
support the following standards:

Domain Names - both A-label and U-label; nameserver Names- A-label, and 
optionally U-label;

Telephone/fax- ITU-T E.123; Email- IETF EAI WG RFCs; Registration Status- Exact 
EPP status where applicable; Dates - ISO 8601-2004.

The rationale for this recommendation is that SSAC members asked: is there a 
reason why standards agreed to in Section 4.2 are not part of the final 
recommendations for action now?  For example, Nameserver, Phone/fax, Dates, 
Registration Status are fields where it appears the WG had consensus. By 
proposing recommendation 4, it made possible for possible actions where the 
IRD-WG had consensus, without having to wait for the translation and 
transliteration issue to resolve.

Attached please find the report (REDLINE, clean version).

We appreciate the IRD-WG members could review these changes and discuss whether 
to approve them by May 9, 2012. If the IRD-WG feel there is a need for a 
teleconference call, staff is happy to organize it.

Kind regards,
Steve


________________________________

California * New York * Texas * Illinois * Nevada * Arizona * Colorado * 
Washington

 Oregon * New Jersey * Florida * Georgia * Connecticut * Missouri * Washington, 
DC * Pennsylvania


This email communication may contain CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION WHICH ALSO MAY BE 
LEGALLY PRIVILEGED and is intended only for the use of the intended recipients 
identified above. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, 
you are hereby notified that any unauthorized review, use, dissemination, 
distribution, downloading, or copying of this communication is strictly 
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this 
communication in error, please immediately notify us by reply email, delete the 
communication and destroy all copies.

IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE
To ensure compliance with requirements by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. 
tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not 
intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) 
avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing 
or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
GORDON & REES LLP
http://www.gordonrees.com<http://www.gordonrees.com/>