ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

RE: [ccnso-idncctld] Final draft Final Report IDNC WG

  • To: "'Bart Boswinkel'" <bart.boswinkel@xxxxxxxxx>, <ccnso-idncctld@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [ccnso-idncctld] Final draft Final Report IDNC WG
  • From: "Chris Disspain" <ceo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:05:17 +1000 (EST)

There seems to be formatting error with the document. All the text is
present. Attached is a reformatted word document and a pdf.
Chris Disspain
CEO - auDA 
Australia's Domain Name Administrator
Important Notice - This email may contain information which is
confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the
use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient,
you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have
received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this
message immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this

From: owner-ccnso-idncctld@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-ccnso-idncctld@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bart Boswinkel
Sent: Tuesday, 24 June 2008 17:54
To: Bart Boswinkel; ccnso-idncctld@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ccnso-idncctld] Final draft Final Report IDNC WG
Dear all,
It seems some of you have not received the documents or there is a page
missing. I've checked this version (again) and there seems to be no
problem at my end. I'll send a clean version in a second email,

On 6/24/08 1:14 AM, "Bart Boswinkel" <bart.boswinkel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear all,
Included is  the final draft (with track changes and clean). This draft is
the final draft. It is for discussion by the GAC and the ccNSO.  

I  suggest that the IDNC WG will meet on Thursday morning at 8 am to have
its final meeting to endorse the Final Report. I'll send out a final
version for approval by the IDNC WG Wednesday evening. This version is for
submission to the Board on Thursday. I'll also arrange a room for the
meeting and let you know where the meeting can take place.

This version includes some  changes to wording as suggested by Bertrand.
It does not include  his suggested change of the re-evaluation
recommendation. Reason is that in some cases the delegation process can
take quite some time. It also does not include include his suggested
change of " evaluated candidate string" as this would introduce a new

In accordance with the suggestion of Cary the description of non-Latin is

In order to avoid confusion with existing ccTLD,, for example the .PY
issue ( the homographic issue), one more technical requirement has been
added. Also included is a new statement that the technical criteria may
need to be updated to comply with the IDNA 2008 protocol, when the review
of IDNA protocol is concluded.This update is considered to be a matter of

Finally, next to UNESCO, the ICC and the WTO are included as examples of
entities that could authenticate the meaning of the selected string.

This report will be published on the ICANN website and forwarded to the
GAC and the ccNSO.
Kind regards,

Attachment: final draft final report _redline_.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Attachment: final draft final report (redline) .doc
Description: MS-Word document

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy