[ccPDP4-IDNWG] NOTES | ccPDP4 IDN SG on de-selection teleconference #2 Tuesday, 12 October 2021 (13:00 UTC)

Tue Oct 12 14:11:56 UTC 2021

NOTES | ccPDP4 IDN SG on de-selection teleconference #2 Tuesday, 12 October 2021 (13:00 UTC)

  1.  Welcome

Welcome by Anil

No apologies received

2.            Administrative matters

a.            Summary ISO3166 presentation – Jaap (recording and slides can be found here<https://community.icann.org/x/jQCHCg>)

the shortened deck will be loaded to the wiki shortly:  https://community.icann.org/x/DQeHCg

Jaap provides a summary, covering the following aspects:

  *   Maintenance agency
  *   Part 1, country codes
  *   Use of alpha-2 codes
  *   Addition, change, removal of codes
  *   Name change
  *   Splitting countries
  *   Possible future changes in 3166 part 1
  *   Impact possible changes

b.    Introduction of working document going forward

Bart prepared an overview doc, which he suggests to use to trigger and record the discussions. Slightly more detailed than the table

  *   Item number
  *   Criteria to focus on
  *   Section number as discussed by full WG
  *   Potential event
  *   Findings by sub-group
  *   Conclusion: is the event of sufficient weight to trigger the removal of the idn cctld?

Peter Koch: I think we need a footnote to explain the use of the term “territory” - cf the discussion on ccnso-members

Bart: also in glossary

This sub-group will discuss: defining the trigger event. What will cause the notice of retirement? Once there is a trigger event, the IANA Functions Operator sends a notice of retirement to the ccTLD Manager, with an invitation to discuss a  retirement plan. The removal of the ccTLD from the root zone is foreseen to happen 5 years after the retirement notice. The ccTLD manager - together with PTI - can potentially agree to extend this deadline, with an additional 5 years.

Leadership team already identified the criteria that may or may not be relevant to consider as a trigger. If there is a change, caused by the event, that would cause non-compliance with the criteria listed, and identified.

Item #1

Various examples. E.g. German Democratic Republic. Political event, but there are also rearrangements within the Kingdom of the Netherlands. E.g. Netherlands Antilles was replaced by a few other codes. Netherlands Antilles was dissolved, therefor the .an code also eventually disappeared, and the ccTLD too.

Item #6

In some cases, the script of the designated language changes.

Item #7

Support for non-objection for the selected string, by the significantly interested parties. (SIP)

3.            overview of retirement process (ccPDP3) – trigger event

Peter: instability in earlier times in unicode. There could be other triggering events of the underlying technology. E.g. introduction of new characters.

Bart: does this fit in item #8, #9, 10?

Peter: We can discuss it there.

Sarmad:

  *   The variant TLDs may actually not be in the designated language-script combination. The original label is. Is that something we want to capture here? Or discuss with the VM-sub group. It is not captured here.
  *   Number 7. This looks reasonable. But, it can potentially cause instability for the registrars. E.g. if SIP decides to change the string for a particular cc for a country. Name of the country has not changed, that could be arbitrary, and generally ok. But could impact existing registrations

Bart:

Valid arguments. To be captured in the rationale.

  *   Support is one of the criteria. But if the group decides so, it could NOT be a trigger event

Regarding the first point: the starting point is that one of the questions the VM-group needs to answer is, should every IDN ccTLD string variant be allocatable for policy reasons? Is there a limitation in policy? This has not been discussed. Awaiting the conclusion about variants

Svitlana: support SIP?

Bart: keep this question for all the events. It will drive the process/procedures, and maybe even the feasibility.

Sarmad:

Also, can there be a trigger event which can impact a variant TLD even if it does not impact the original string? We will develop some criteria that say that certain variant TLDs are allowed, and some or not. If one of those gets invalidated, it could act as a trigger event for that TLD

Anil:

Can we first go through the recommendations from ccPDP3? So we can get the background? Understood that it is submitted and approved by Council

4.            Discussion deselection of IDN strings

>>> Item #1

Peter: significant name change. See what Jaap presented. Not a clear cut case

Bart: it is clear. See DDR removal. You refer to point 2.

Here it is “striking” the entry.

Anil: in most of the cases the IDNccTLD and the ccTLD follow the same route regarding the retirement process. If the name of the country changes, but no change in local script, and in local challenge, the idn cctld does not change

Bart: yes, to be discussed under number 2. Various options

Svitlana: If two different managers run  ccTLD and IDN-TLD, then the process of retirement should be split into different processes.

Jaap: under the maintenance of the standard, we talk about addition, deletion or alteration of the code element.

Hadia: deletion is deletion. What is the process of reassociation? Alterations, see number 2

Jaap: If you look AN in the IANA database its status is INACTIVE

Peter: retired as in <https://www.iana.org/domains/root/db/an.html>

5.            Next Meeting

9 November | 14:00 UTC

23 November | 14:00 UTC

6.            AOB

Svitlana: please remember to check the wiki.

7.            Closure

Thank you all.

Joke Braeken
ccNSO Policy Advisor
joke.braeken at icann.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccpdp4-idnwg/attachments/20211012/1516cc5c/attachment-0001.html>