ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[At-Large Advisory Committee]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[alac] ICANN Topic Paper and IDNA

  • To: "Vittorio Bertola" <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [alac] ICANN Topic Paper and IDNA
  • From: "Dr Xue Hong" <hongxue@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2003 18:40:31 +0800

Here is my initial thought on IDN issues.

The DNS mapping technology has been functioning only using Latin (Roman).
Considering that there are more than 6,700 languages that are being used on
the Internet, the functional limitation in the addressing system is not
consistent with the global nature of the Internet. The internationalization
of the languages and characters needs to be expressed in the DNS. IETF has
been working to internationalize the domain name system at the application
layer by standardizing a system for the translation of non-ASCII characters
into unique ASCII strings that can be resolved by the existing domain name
system. In October 2002, IETF approved for publication the three documents
that together define "Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications"
(IDNA). In March 2003, as a condition to authorizing IDNA registrations,
ICANN published the "Standards for ICANN Authorization of Internationalized
Domain Name Registrations in Registries with Agreements". The paper
synthesizes the work of ICANN's IDN Committee and other discussions or
debates. We hope this paper could promote a cooperative environment in which
registries would consult with the relevant user communities to establish
registration procedures that are widely adopted, predictable, and broadly
acceptable to users.

>From the prospect of individual users, we hope the implementation of IDNA
could ensure both the interests of the domain name registrants and the
interests of ordinary consumers. In the past various test-beds of
registrations of IDNs, TLD registries have permitted numerous "conflicting
names" (a same term in different versions, which are typographically rather
than semantical similar) to be registered by different registrants for lack
of proper character variants tables or ignorance of the development of such
tables. Take example of the domain names in Chinese language, the surveys
show that about 18% to 23% of Chinese IDN.com, about 16% to 21% of Chinese
IDN.net and about 15% to 20% of Chinese IDN.org are "conflict names". The
existence of conflicting names has already caused widespread user confusion
and new opportunities for cybersquatting, both of which are contradictory to
the interests of the individual users (both the registrants and consumers).
We hope the Internet community could learn the lesson from "conflicting
names", and in the future implementation of IDNA, ICANN could, on the basis
of the agreement with the registries, closely supervise the TLD registries'
to ensure their commitment to character variants tables and
language-specific registration policies, with the objective of achieving
consistent approaches to IDN implementation for the benefit of DNS users


----- Original Message -----
From: "Vittorio Bertola" <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <alac@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 4:29 PM
Subject: [alac] Next actions

> These are the action points we decided in Saturday's call (please
> correct me if I missed something).
> I remind everyone that any comments on Denise's draft (hopefully soon
> updated) about ALS-RALO MoU, and possibly on Thomas's draft about
> internal procedures, should be sent by Wednesday evening. Please do.
> * gTLD
> Wendy: prepare a draft statement on the sTLD criteria document
> (http://www.icann.org/riodejaneiro/stld-rfp-topic.htm) in the next 1-2
> weeks.
> * IDN
> We didn't assign this because I feel that Hong is the most up-to-date
> person on this, so I want to discuss this on list. Hong, perhaps you
> and the couple of us who have been active in the thread (I and
> Sebastian) should prepare a statement that covers the different
> problems in the different Regions. What do you think about this? (Also
> other people are welcome)
> * ENUM
> Esther: gather information and propose possible actions on the
> subject.
> No actions in the short term? (Thomas will keep us updated - of course
> we should not miss the privacy PDP)
> * Budget
> Denise: resend to everyone the last approved budget and any available
> updates on how much we've spent.
> Everyone: remember to put Denise in copy when sending reimbursement
> requests in.
> * Internal procedures
> Everyone: review Thomas's draft - please submit any observations in
> the next days (let's say by Wednesday evening) (Izumi, feel free to
> resubmit your one so that we can consider it more carefully). After
> all observations are cleared, I will call a "no objection" period of 3
> days after which we will consider the procedures approved - unless
> anyone objects to the no objection procedure :-)
> * WSIS
> Erick and Izumi: keep the ALAC informed about what's happening; if at
> any time you feel that direct involvement is appropriate, propose it.
> * NomCom
> Everyone: think at possible comments to be sent to the NomCom about
> their public call
> * At Large Structure Criteria & RALO MoU
> Denise: post revised draft as soon as possible
> Everyone: review Denise's next draft and post any request for changes
> by Wednesday evening (California time). After that, we will post the
> draft on the website for public comment.
> --
> vb.                  [Vittorio Bertola - vb [at] bertola.eu.org]<---
> -------------------> http://bertola.eu.org/ <-----------------------

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy