[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [Ext] RE: Follow up on "exceptionally reserved" codes

Mon Nov 19 19:28:36 UTC 2018

Dear Alexander,

The “United Nations” will be afforded Reserved Name status (with an exception procedure for the relevant organization) in future versions of the Applicant Guidebook as a result of the recommendations from the Protection of IGO and INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs PDP WG’s that were adopted by the ICANN Board (i.e., that were not inconsistent with GAC Advice).

You can find the relevant ICANN Board Resolution here: https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2014-04-30-en#2.a
One of the Resolved clauses states, “the Board hereby adopts the GNSO Council's unanimous recommendations on the Protection of IGO-INGO Identifiers in All gTLDs set forth in Annex A [PDF, 74 KB] attached hereto (which includes the GNSO recommendations that are not inconsistent with the GAC's advice).” You can find Annex A here: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/resolutions-annex-a-30apr14-en.pdf, which notes in the table that for Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs), the GNSO recommends to “Reserve Full Names of IGOs on GAC List at Top and Second Levels, in 2 languages, with Exception Procedure”
The GAC List can be found here https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/dryden-to-crocker-chalaby-annex2-22mar13-en.pdf, where you can find the “United Nations” as item 153.

In summary, “United Nations” and a number of other full names of IGOs will be afforded Reserved Name status in future versions of the Applicant Guidebook (as IGOs, not geographic names). Hopefully this context is helpful.

Best,

Steve

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander at schubert.berlin>
Reply-To: "alexander at schubert.berlin" <alexander at schubert.berlin>
Date: Monday, November 19, 2018 at 9:36 AM
To: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [Ext] RE: Follow up on "exceptionally reserved" codes

Hi Emily,

Now I “get” it. In our policies we are always using “long or short form of……”, and indeed: that field is empty! My bad. It’s described at the end in:
“Status Remark”  -  “Refers to the United Nations and reserved by the ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency.”

But while that is making clear what is MEANT, for our purposes we have a problem – as it is not the “official” “long or short form of…” “UN”!

Two possibilities: 
We either list that one “explicitly”  in the list of reserved names (feels a bit overprotective), or
We assume that nobody will try to register it; and IF they did then the UN will have to decide whether they want to object! I assume if the UN “objects” to smth (ANYTHING) their voice will be heard ……

So while “United Nations” is “associated” with “UN” – it would still slip through our policy framework….

Thanks,

Alexander.berlin

From: Emily Barabas [mailto:emily.barabas at icann.org] 
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 10:26 AM
To: alexander at schubert.berlin; gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [Ext] RE: Follow up on "exceptionally reserved" codes

Hi Alexander,

A quick point of clarification – 

Are you referring to this record?: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:code:3166:UN [iso.org]

Based on what I am seeing on the ISO online browsing platform, it does not appear that the exceptionally reserved code “UN” has a short form (short name) or long form (full) name.

Kind regards,

Emily

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Alexander Schubert <alexander at schubert.berlin>
Reply-To: "alexander at schubert.berlin" <alexander at schubert.berlin>
Date: Saturday, 17 November 2018 at 21:27
To: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [Ext] RE: Follow up on "exceptionally reserved" codes

In the ISO 3166-1 Alpha-2 “Exceptional reservations” it says:

Code: “UN”
Area name or country name: “United Nations”

So yes: “.unitednations” is protected. Not that I can imagine anybody to apply for it! And it wouldn’t be protected: that’s a real nice example why we should NEVER cut ANY rights to objection (bright line rule).

Thanks,

Alexander.berlin

From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Nick Wenban-Smith
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2018 12:15 AM
To: Emily Barabas <emily.barabas at icann.org>; Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap at NLnetLabs.nl>; lists at christopherwilkinson.eu Wilkinson <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] [Ext] RE: Follow up on "exceptionally reserved" codes

Actually I just noticed that there is no name associated with the UN code – so in theory .UNITEDNATIONS would have be eligible? (or at least not classified as non-geographic?)

From: Emily Barabas <emily.barabas at icann.org> 
Sent: 16 November 2018 13:55
To: Nick Wenban-Smith <Nick.Wenban-Smith at nominet.uk>; Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap at NLnetLabs.nl>; lists at christopherwilkinson.eu Wilkinson <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: Follow up on "exceptionally reserved" codes

Hi Nick,

Thanks for the question. It’s a little easier to see using the decoding table as reference: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:pub:PUB500001:en [iso.org]. For the code “EZ” (https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:code:3166:EZ [iso.org]) you will see that there is no short or long form name associated with the code. Therefore, there was no reservation in the AGB associated with this one. The code “SU” (see https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:code:3166:SU [iso.org]) has the short form name “USSR.” Therefore, USSR was reserved. 

I hope this helps. 

Kind regards,

Emily

From: Nick Wenban-Smith <Nick.Wenban-Smith at nominet.uk>
Date: Wednesday, 14 November 2018 at 11:29
To: Emily Barabas <emily.barabas at icann.org>, Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap at NLnetLabs.nl>, "lists at christopherwilkinson.eu Wilkinson" <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
Subject: RE: [Ext] RE: Follow up on "exceptionally reserved" codes

Ah thanks Emily – I got that United Nations was associated with UN, and European Union with EU, and so those names were reserved. But what was the name(s) associated with the EZ code? And for SU is the associated name former USSR or just USSR? 

These are quite minor points in the scheme of things though. In the alternative we could just go with:

The 2012 Applicant Guidebook reserved any string that is a “short- or long-

form name association with a code that has been designated as “exceptionally reserved” by the ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency”. The Work Track members discussed the effect of this provision and do not recommend any changes are made to it, in effect the terms United Nations and European Union continue to be reserved.

From: Emily Barabas <emily.barabas at icann.org> 
Sent: 14 November 2018 09:32
To: Nick Wenban-Smith <Nick.Wenban-Smith at nominet.uk>; Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap at NLnetLabs.nl>; lists at christopherwilkinson.eu Wilkinson <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Ext] RE: Follow up on "exceptionally reserved" codes

Hi Nick,

Thanks for this feedback. I just wanted to highlight that the 2012 Applicant Guidebook provision did cover all names associated with codes on the list, regardless of whether they were country and territory names or not. In other words, GDD has confirmed that the effect of the provision was consistent with the way the language was presented in the AGB. The Work Track is welcome to suggest a change to the provision, but it may be helpful for the WT to suggest a specific change rather than requesting clarification, unless there is still something that is unclear about the existing language at this point.

Kind regards,

Emily

From: Nick Wenban-Smith <Nick.Wenban-Smith at nominet.uk>
Date: Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 15:59
To: Emily Barabas <emily.barabas at icann.org>, Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap at NLnetLabs.nl>, "lists at christopherwilkinson.eu Wilkinson" <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] RE: Follow up on "exceptionally reserved" codes

Thanks Emily and to Jaap (I hope you are feeling better now) and Christopher

I was looking at whether I could propose some revised text for the draft report to get the ball rolling.

So I can see from the online browsing platform that there are 12 codes we are talking about here: 

Alpha-2 codeEnglish short nameRemark
ACRefers to Ascension Island and reserved at the request of Universal Postal Union (UPU)
CPRefers to Clipperton Island and reserved at the request of International Telecommunication Union (ITU).
DGRefers to Diego Garcia and reserved at the request of International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
EARefers to Ceuta, Melilla and reserved at the request of World Customs Organization (WCO).
EURefers to European Union and reserved at the request of ISO 4217/MA (March 1998) for ISO 6166, Securities - International securities identification numbering system (ISIN).
EZRefers to European OTC derivatives and reserved at the request of ISO 6166/RA, Securities - International securities identification numbering system (ISIN).
FXFrance, MetropolitanRefers to Metropolitan France and reserved at the request of France.
ICRefers to the Canary Islands and reserved at the request of World Customs Organization (WCO)
SUUSSRRefers to the former USSR and reserved at the request of the Foundation for Internet Development (FID).
TARefers to Tristan da Cunha and reserved at the request of Universal Postal Union (UPU).
UKRefers to the United Kingdom and reserved at the request of United Kingdom.
UNRefers to the United Nations and reserved by the ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency.

[Disclaimer obviously UK is one of those on the list, but since UK is already delegated and United Kingdom associated in any case with the GB code I don’t think what I suggest below makes any difference to us.]

Looking at the draft text for the WT5 report, would it be better to amend as follows:

The 2012 Applicant Guidebook reserved any string that is a “short- or long-

form name association with a code that has been designated as “exceptionally reserved” by the ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency”. Upon more detailed advice and examination of those “exceptionally reserved” codes it has been highlighted that the effect of reserving the short- or long- form names associated with the “exceptionally reserved” codes in the 2012 Applicant Guidebook is unclear. For example in the case of EZ which is exceptionally reserved as referring to OTC derivatives, and whether or not this resulted in the exclusion of ‘United Nations’ and ‘European Union’ from being allowed as new gTLDs in the AGB2012 since those terms are not country names. This provision should be clarified for the next round of new gTLDs. Some Work Track members have stated that an “exceptionally reserved” list does not exist under the ISO 3166 standard, and therefore it is unclear what this provision references. Do you agree or disagree? Please explain.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20181119/31072f4c/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4600 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20181119/31072f4c/smime-0001.p7s>