ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

RE: [registrars] [Fwd: [council] Registry Constituency IDN communiqué]

  • To: ross@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: RE: [registrars] [Fwd: [council] Registry Constituency IDN communiqué]
  • From: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 07:27:23 -0700
  • Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxx
  • Reply-to: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I think for the most part we could support the Registries on this. Much
of it is already defined as RFC or in existing guidelines. Certanly,
not allowing mixed character set domain names makes some sense. 

But I have some concerns when/if they get to trying to eliminate
homographs within LDH (proposed by the Registries to become a language

For example, will name0 and nameo become the same string? Or will the
the registration of altoons.com (currently in use) prohibit the
registration of a1toons.com (currently available)? 


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [registrars] [Fwd:_[council]_Registry_Constituen
From: "Ross Rader" <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, February 24, 2005 12:41 pm
To: registrars@xxxxxxxx

This is an important document. I had a long chat with Cary about this 
communique last week and indicated to him that I would support this 
activity within the registrar constituency. Please review at your 
earlier convenience and definitely pass on any comments you might have.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [council] Registry Constituency IDN communiqué
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 10:59:30 +0100 (CET)
From: Cary Karp <ck@nic.museum>
Reply-To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The communiqué that I mentioned at last week's Council meeting is
now on-line at:


You may also wish to note the broader topic page that ICANN has
posted at:





Contact info: http://www.blogware.com/profiles/ross
Skydasher: A great way to start your day
My weblog: http://www.byte.org 

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