<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [council] Topics for Joint Meetings in Brussels
Good idea Andrei. I will let Chris know.
Chuck
From: Andrei Kolesnikov [mailto:andrei@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 8:42 AM
To: Gomes, Chuck; 'Edmon Chung'; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] Topics for Joint Meetings in Brussels
Chuck,
For sync TLDs we need guys from CNNIC and/or TWNIC and their willingness to
share their experience and plans. If Chris can get a confirmation, this will be
really interesting and useful. Also it will be interesting to hear from CNNIC
about their planned procedure to sync their IDN.CN with IDN.IDN.
--andrei
From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 3:56 PM
To: Andrei Kolesnikov; Edmon Chung; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] Topics for Joint Meetings in Brussels
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
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|