[council] [Fwd: Resolution of the ccNSO Council on timing of the new IDN gTLD and "Fast Track" process]

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

-------- Forwarded Message --------
From: Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Chris Disspain <ceo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Resolution of the ccNSO Council on timing of the new IDN gTLD
and "Fast Track" process
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 09:51:23 -0800

Avri,
This is the resolution of the ccNSO Council Chris referred to. It is
also published on the ccnso website (www.ccnso.icann.org). 
Kind regards,
Bart 
---------------------

"Resolution ccNSO Council  19 February 2009 on timing of the launch of
the IDN ccTLD Fast Track and new IDN gTLD process.
Background

In 2007 the ccNSO, and the ICANN community generally, discussed the
possibility of using an interim approach to IDN ccTLDs associated with
the ISO 3166-1 two-letter codes to meet near-term demands and to gain
experience with mechanisms for the selection and delegation of IDN
ccTLDs that would also inform a policy development process aimed at
creating an overall policy on IDN ccTLDs. 

To that end in November 2007 the ICANN Board requested the chairs of the
ALAC, ccNSO , GAC, GNSO and SSAC to establish a working group (the IDNC
Working Group) to develop and report on feasible methods, if any, that
would enable the introduction, in a timely manner and in a manner that
ensures the continued security and stability of the Internet, of a
limited number of IDN ccTLDs while the overall policy is being
developed.

After extensive community comment, the IDNC Working Group submitted its
final report to the ICANN Board.

In May 2008 the Board directed ICANN staff to post the IDNC WG final
report for public comments, commence work on implementation issues in
consultation with relevant stakeholders and submit a detailed
implementation plan including a list of any outstanding issues to the
Board in advance of the ICANN Cairo meeting in November 2008.

Resolution
The ccNSO Council notes that the GNSO Council submitted substantive
comments on the IDNC WG final report. Included in those comments was a
statement that “the introduction of IDN gTLDs or IDN ccTLDs should not
be delayed because of lack of readiness of one category, but if they are
not introduced at the same time, steps should be taken so that neither
category is advantaged or disadvantaged, and procedures should be
developed to avoid possible conflicts” (GNSO Council submission, 15
August 2008).

The ccNSO Council also notes the GNSO Council resolution of 8 January
2009, which states that the GNSO Council strongly believes that neither
the new gTLD nor ccTLD fast track process should result in IDN TLDs
being entered into the root before the other unless both the GNSO and
ccNSO so agree.

The ccNSO Council notes the apparent change in the view of the GNSO
regarding the timing of the IDN ccTLD Fast Track and the new IDN gTLD
process. 'Prior to stating the ccNSO Council position, we would welcome
a discussion with the GNSO Council to gain a better understanding of the
apparent change in view."