ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

[council] ccNSO update

  • To: GNSO Council <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [council] ccNSO update
  • From: Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 19:49:23 -0300
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=Nkp5O/eDaaIr32Kh+tBYDVbE/GlarNxls7ft2GVwE3Y=; b=ALjvpD5U1cagBcF9mICMITyQ/q1VB/x+RgPowg5AdqMP+tdaVgH6FzZg3JtnO2mHUQ yqaW8ppiMSyzmL8nBe7FP8kk+IFCp2ddcI/vFtA4rcHwZKBdNs+P0gYzAdoXfp305jfG 0avhR0Av6w873mN+zmr6GB6nuY9OHYvcP+0aY=
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; b=f7GqUCG4f6ZcY98alyhdHhumt5Y2SYXEg1TPVvFrgsEg9rkXit5k5r8PvYVf+0NU84 Hs8vKv+H1eq671chl+utfKVCGM1NTHvX6HkKut/L9x89BZqk2r3bp7wkc4cYG8Y3E4t1 nS7lE58UxvGQYJ9log2X/waiFay1r3l6G4pa0=
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

included in this email you can find the text of the recently approved
resolution in respect to IDN ccTLDs under fast track.

*Resolution of the ccNSO Council in respect to IDN ccTLDs delegated under
the Fast Track *

*The ccNSO Council resolved: *

IDN ccTLDs should be treated similarly to ASCII ccTLDs and so:.

   *1 On the Relationship between ICANN and IDN ccTLD Managers*

   1.1 The entering into of a documented relationship between ICANN and an
   IDN ccTLD manager should be voluntary and not a requirement for the
   delegation of the IDN ccTLD.

   1.2 Such a documented relationship should be encouraged

   1.3 It is in the best interest of IDN ccTLDs managers and the entire DNS
   community to adhere to all relevant IETF standards (including the IDNA
   protocol) and the IDN Guidelines and to commit to complying with future IDNA
   protocol updates.

*2 On Financial Contributions to ICANN*

   1. Financial contributions should be voluntary and should not be a
      requirement for the delegation of an IDN ccTLD.
      2. As previously stated by ccTLD managers, detailed information from
      ICANN on the breakdown of the costs involved in the IDN ccTLD Fast Track
      programme (and other costs ICANN incurs related to ccTLDs) would
be welcome
      and help advance discussions.
      3. Concrete proposals on possible financial contribution models would
      also help to advance discussions.
      4. The Council acknowledges and appreciates that work on the
      information outlined in 2.2 and 2.3. has commenced and looks forward to
      receiving it as soon as possible.

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