[Cwg-rfp1-2a-2b] FW: RFP-1 update

[Gomes, Chuck]

I will leave to the experts in the ccTLD world to ensure that the language we use in our proposal is accurate and applicable to the task at hand for the IANA transition regarding names.  For now, I am going to make the edits that have been provided; if there are any more needed after we send our proposals to the full CWG list, they can be made later when the whole group is discussing the proposals.

One favor I would like to ask of everyone in our subgroup is this:  Please participate in the discussion in the CWG as those outside our subgroup ask questions and make comments especially with regard your areas of expertise.  This will be helpful both on the CWG calls and on the CWG email list.

Thanks, Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: cwg-rfp1-2a-2b-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-rfp1-2a-2b-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Paul M Kane
Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2014 8:52 AM
To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
Cc: CWG-RFP-1-2AB (cwg-rfp1-2a-2b at icann.org)
Subject: Re: [Cwg-rfp1-2a-2b] FW: RFP-1 update



Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:
>
>
> [...]
>
>>    *
>>
>>
>>     * Your comment 8 regarding the retirement of ccTLD codes - This
>>       section simply states that the ISO3166 list is dynamic and does
>>       change - it does not imply that IANA changes it (although IANA
>>       does participate in ISO3166) , ICANN/IANA uses the ISO3166 list
>>       to confirm what are countries and territories for the purposes
>>       of allocating ccTLD and IDN ccTLD codes and uses the ISO3166-1
>>       list to allocate the corresponding two letter ASCII codes but
>>       ISO3166 does not manage ccTLDs. When a country code is retired
>>       by ISO it is usually put on a reserved list for 50 years but
>>       what should ICANN/IANA do given there are domain names
>>       registered in the retiring domain. These changes are not always
>>       a simple replacement of one for an another as per the example
>>       of Czechoslovakia which was a split. The retirement of a ccTLD
>>       can have a significant impact on its user community and is a
>>       process like delegation and re-delegation which must be managed
>>       by IANA.
>>
>
> Thank you for this excellent explanation. You are absolutely correct - 
> I hadn't thought about the needs in retiring ccTLDs, or keeping them 
> on the list as ccTLDs well beyond their removal from the ISO3166-1 list.

One needs to be careful when referring to the reserved list and "retiring codes" .  Some codes on the reserved list (and I assume that means ISO-3166-2 list) are _far_ _from_ retiring that are listed on 3166-2.  There are a few of them used as ccTLDs - I do not know them all but .UK is on the is on 3166-2 and that is _not_ retiring to my knowledge!

Best

Paul
_______________________________________________
Cwg-rfp1-2a-2b mailing list
Cwg-rfp1-2a-2b at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-rfp1-2a-2b