<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
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/пр
иказ1.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.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|