RE: [council] Topics for Joint Meetings in Brussels

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Andrei,

 

Rather than change topics, would it be possible to tie in some of the related 
topics to the Sync TLDs topic?  If not, we probably could change topics.  
Certainly, we do not want to talk about Sync TLDs if it is not going to 
generate any useful discussion.

 

Chuck

 

From: Andrei Kolesnikov [mailto:andrei@xxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 7:47 AM
To: 'Edmon Chung'; Gomes, Chuck; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] Topics for Joint Meetings in Brussels

 

I know, Edmon. I plan to attend JIG meeting of course ?C I live in IDN country 
and won’t miss a thing J

The JIG issues  partly were covered in Nairobi at gNSO/ccNSO dinner. The 
loudest news since Nairobi was straight-forward  resolution of the Board 
regarding sync TLDs for China and Taiwan. 

Also it will be interesting to hear reps ccNSO members from China and Taiwan 
about how they plan to implement the sync restrictions. And I will do a short 
update ?C 5 minutes max, the issue kind of hanged after April 22-nd resolution 
of the Board.

Will add up  potential dname, bname usage / IETF works and admin enforcements. 
This all about sync TLDs.  

 

However, there is a world outside. My idea was to run a short update about this 
outside world to demonstrate that this world is still ascii based and there is 
a long way to go.

 

If it’s too late to change subjects ?C fine, I’ll do sync TLDs and attracted 
council members can join the IDN software developers consortium on June 19th

 

--andrei

 

From: Edmon Chung [mailto:edmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 12:13 PM
To: 'Gomes, Chuck'; 'Andrei Kolesnikov'; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] Topics for Joint Meetings in Brussels

 

Andrei,

I believe you are with us at the JIG as well.  This has been identified as one 
of the issues of common interest.  Would be good to further these discussions 
there as well.

We will have a meeting in Brussels as well.  The meeting is set for Tuesday 
morning 8am (http://brussels38.icann.org/full-schedule)

Edmon

 

 

 

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Wednesday, June 9, 2010 4:52 AM
To: Andrei Kolesnikov; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] Topics for Joint Meetings in Brussels

 

Unfortunately, I sent Chris the two proposed topics yesterday and he was 
planning on discussing them with the ccNSO today so it may be too late to 
change topics now.  Assuming it is not too late, we would need to keep the 
topics to a minimum because we only have 90 minutes and part of that will be 
taken up by lunch.  In my opinion, topics should be of general interest to most 
people in attendance and not too technical.  Topics that benefit from joint 
ccNSO/GNSO discussion are ideal.

 

Chuck

 

From: Andrei Kolesnikov [mailto:andrei@xxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 3:33 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] Topics for Joint Meetings in Brussels

 

Dear colleagues, 

 

Regarding gNSO/ccNSO meeting and sync TLDs as a topic.  I propose a different 
theme, because I have a feeling, that Sync TLD theme today has a very limited 
implication, refer to Board resolution:

Whereas, the methodology to be taken by the IDN ccTLD manager to handle these 
particular instances of parallel IDN ccTLDs is, in the short-term, the only 
option available, but there are serious limits to where such an approach is 
viable in practice, so that it cannot be viewed as a general solution, and that 
consequently, long-term development work should be pursued;

Whereas, significant analysis and possibly development work should continue on 
both policy-based and technical elements of a solution for the introduction on 
a more general basis of strings containing variants as TLD;

My recommendation to gNSO and ccNSO councilors is to focus on interesting and 
“yet unknown” issues of “IDNs in non-IDN world”.  Please find below a short 
list of issues to cover:

 

IDNs in NON-IDN world

The issues and problems for the end users, registrars and registries are very 
similar: this world is not ready for IDNs

Support of browsers

Overview of browsers behavior. DNS traffic cash-in: why local script goes to 
.COM? Why Google is my default for the IDN script / browser localization? How 
IDN development changes the food chain of typos, not-founds? 

Support of email

Email functionality adds up to IDN popularity. Update on IETF.

IDN code: “IDN-ization”, where to stop?

IDN code гттп://президент.рф/постановления/приказ1.гтяр

Community activities to get the thing done right

what can be done jointly ccNSO / gNSO to speed up IDN support on application 
level? What should we demand?

 

 

Best regards,

 

--andrei

 

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2010 12:36 AM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] Topics for Joint Meetings in Brussels
Importance: High

 

<<Survey for Board meeting with GNSO in Brussels.docx>> 

Assuming  I didn’t miss anyone’s preferences, here is a summary of support for 
discussion topics in our joint meetings in Brussels:

GAC/GNSO meeting

1.      DAG 4, including morality and public order

o       Support: Bill, Jaime, Wolf, Mary

o       Oppose: 

2.      AoC, including A&T RT and next reviews

o       Support: Bill, Jaime, Wolf, Mary

o       Oppose: 

3.      RAA

o       Support: Chuck, Mary?

o       Oppose: 

4.      IDN ccPDP

o       Support: 

o       Oppose: Chuck, 

If there are no objections by Monday, I plan to suggest to Janis that we 
discuss topics 1 & 2 with the GAC.  And would like to request a volunteer (or 
volunteers) to draft a brief (less than 5 minutes) intro to each topic 
including any questions we might have for the GAC.

Board/Staff/GNSO dinner meeting

1.      There are rumblings that there are some on the Board who think this 
meeting has outlived its usefulness; in light of that, it might be useful to 
discuss the value or lack of value from both the GNSO and Board/Staff 
perspective.

o       Support: Chuck, Stéphane

o       Oppose:  

2.      What do Board members understand about the AoC commitment to promote 
competition, consumer trust, and consumer choice in the DNS marketplace, with a 
particular focus on GNSO work

o       Support: Rosemary, Wolf

o       Oppose:  

3.      ICANN and Internet governance directions

o       Support: Terry, Bill, Jaime, Rafik, Mary

o       Oppose:  Wolf

4.      DAG 4, including morality and public order

o       Support: Wolf, Mary

Note that I sent the attached survey to Bruce Tonkin for the purpose of getting 
individual Board responses and asking Bruce what the best way of doing that 
would be.

ccNSO/GNSO meeting

1.      DNS-CERT

o       Support: Chuck, Bill, Mary

o       Oppose: 

2.      Synchronized TLDs

o       Support: Andrei

o       Oppose: 

If there are no objections by Monday, I will send these topics to Chris.  
Andrei has volunteered to prepare a brief intro to the Synchronized TLDs topic. 
 We need a volunteer for the DNS-CERT to do the same.

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2924 - Release Date: 06/08/10 
14:35:00