RE: [gnso-idn-wg] Comment on: 4.1 Introduction of IDN gTLDs in relation to new non-IDN gTLDs

["Yoav Keren" <yoav@xxxxxxxx>]

Sophia and Charles are both right in not allowing the reservation of the
IDN gtld string beforehand.  This could create more issues and
confusion. It should be rejected. We should simply finish all IDN policy
criteria and ongoing IDN testing even if it means the ASCII gTLD round
has to go first, and resulting in some relatively small negative impact
on later IDN awards (eg. reserved names etc). 

Therefore I think we should either delete the sentence: "Support for
options to reserve IDN gTLD strings in case the first application round
can only address non-IDN gTLD applications fully. ", or change it to an
alternative view, and change the statement of: "resolve IDN policy
issues before launch of  application round" to either support or
agreement. 

 

Yoav 

________________________________

From: owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Sophia B
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 4:01 AM
To: gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx; GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-idn-wg] Comment on: 4.1 Introduction of IDN gTLDs in
relation to new non-IDN gTLDs

 

4.1.1   

Support for a first application round open to both non-IDN gTLDs and 
IDN gTLDs, if possible. 

    -- I support this but, I recommend we add a wording "as long as the
IDN 
      criteria setting process is completed".

Support for options to reserve IDN gTLD strings in case the first 
application round can only address non-IDN gTLD applications fully. 
  

   --This gets tricky.  As Charles Shaban mentioned in a similar view, I
      think an option to reserve is a bad option, since there is no 
      rule for reserving and leaves to bias.  This actually would
suggest an
      entire policy development process.  Who is to decide for
      reserving/wait listing?  An IDN policy criteria should be
      finalised before embarking on any reservation or application of 
      strings. I cannot see any benefit for having a reserve process
      beforehand, and only see potential confusion.

Alternative view: resolve IDN policy issues before launch of
application round.

    --I think we should move this Alternative View to a 'Support' level,
since 

      like Shaban I categorically think that IDN Policy criteria needs
to be set 

      before we start considering IDN deployment. If the problem is that
further 

      ASCII gTLD rounds will be delayed because of some limited overlap 

      between IDN policy and non-ASCII new GTLD policy,  I would rather
take our 

      chances and go ahead with ASCII gTLD applications ahead of IDN 

      applications/reservations despite any limited cross-impact.
Anyway, I 

      can accept  an alternative view, but I would like to see if there
is more

      SUPPORT or AGREEMENT.

 

Regards,

Sophia