ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


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

[council] Update on CWG-UCTN

  • To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: [council] Update on CWG-UCTN
  • From: Heather Forrest <Heather.Forrest@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 03:11:00 +0000
  • Accept-language: en-US
  • Authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Heather.Forrest@xxxxxxxxxx;
  • Cc: Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez <crg@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Lars Hoffmann" <lars.hoffmann@xxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-secs@xxxxxxxxx>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
  • Spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
  • Thread-index: AQHQ7D7lRVv2h0RqQEGhXGDQMWWzxw==
  • Thread-topic: Update on CWG-UCTN

Dear Council colleagues,


Following up on the missed agenda item from our previous Council meeting, 
Carlos and I are pleased to provide a concise update on the activity of the 
CWG-UCTN (Cross-Community Working Group on the Use of Country and Territory 
Names as top-level domains. The objective of the CWG-UCTN is to review the 
current status of representations of country and territory names, as they exist 
under current ICANN policies, guidelines and procedures. In addition, the Group 
has been asked to provide advice regarding the feasibility of developing a 
consistent and uniform set of definitions that could be applicable across the 
respective SO's and AC's for country and territory names as top-level domains.


Since ICANN53, the CWG has reached preliminary conclusions in relation to the 
use of two-letter codes. We are working to publish an interim report setting 
out those preliminary conclusions prior to ICANN54. Applying a similar 
methodology to that used in analysing 2-letter codes whereby we start with 
information gathering to ascertain current usage, the CWG has recently 
circulated to SG and C leaders a short list of questions about current practice 
in the use of 3-letter codes as TLDs. I'm aware that as Dublin approaches we 
are all increasingly busy, but if there is any opportunity to do I would be 
grateful if you could encourage your SG and C members to respond and send their 
responses to Lars Hoffmann (lars.hoffmann@xxxxxxxxx), who is part of the CWG's 
staff support team, prior to the start of ICANN54. Input received now will help 
to shape our face-to-face discussions in Dublin and develop a work plan going 
forward.


I note in closing that the ccNSO members of the WG have been very active both 
in terms of participating in the CWG and in contributing to the calls for 
information on current practice. I fear that if we do not have sufficient input 
from the GNSO side, the CWG will embark on a ccNSO-centric discussion, leading 
to ccNSO-centric findings and conclusions.


Many thanks and best wishes,


Heather Forrest, CWG-UCTN co-chair (GNSO)

Carlos Raul Gutierrez, CWG-UCTN co-chair (GNSO); GNSO Council Liaison to the CWG




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