[IDN-WG] CCNSO IDNC WG IDN Topic List on Introduction of ccTLD under fast-track

[Hong Xue]

On December 14, 2007, CCNSO published the IDNC working group charter
http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/idnc-charter.htm. A "Topic list for
Initial Report on introduction IDN ccTLD under fast track" was circulated in
the working group list at the same time. The scope of the IDNC WG is limited
to developing feasible methods (for the introduction of a limited number of
IDN ccTLDs) that do not pre-empt the outcomes of the IDN ccPDP. A list of
topics is drafted to form the structure of discussion on the mechanisms of
fast-track implementation. Comment and input are sought on the relevance of
the topics listed and whether there are additional topics. *Comments need to
be received by 16 January*. So far, comments on the chair of the working
group, working process and nature of fast track approach have been sent to
the list.

The comments may be on 2 specific mechanisms:

1. A mechanism for the selection of the IDN ccTLD string;

Topics:
o What are the requirements regarding the status of the script/language in
the territory to be used in the IDN ccTLD string?
o Is there a limit to the number of scripts per territory to be used as an
IDN ccTLD under the fast track approach? Should it be limited to one (1) per
territory or some other number?
o Who should be able to propose a string for the territory?
o Who is required to endorse a string once proposed?
o What are the criteria for such a string to be acceptable under the fast
track (for example: meaningful representation in a selected script of the
name of the territory or recognized abbreviation as
listed on ISO 3166 -1)
o Will a proposed string be 'evaluated' against criteria? If so, who will
the 'evaluator' be and who will appoint them?
o Assuming a string and script are selected in accordance with proposed
criteria, should there be an objection procedure? If so, who should be
eligible to object? On what grounds? What is the
impact of an objection (for example non-eligibility under fast track)?


2. A mechanism to designate an IDN ccTLD manager

Topics:
o Should any criteria specific to IDNs be taken into consideration for the
designation of an IDN ccTLD manager?
o Are there any specific requirements regarding the technical and
operational readiness of the eligible IDN ccTLD manager?
o Should there be a proven track record for running a TLD operationally?
o Should the eligible entity have experience (operationally or
experimentally) with running IDN in the relevant script at the second and
/or higher levels?
o Should adherence to the IDNA protocol and related requirements be ensured?
How should this be ensured?
o Is the registration policy of the IDN ccTLD relevant in relation to the
IDNA protocols and related requirements? If so how is adherence to such
required policy ensured?


I'm strongly suggesting the new ALAC IDN WG under the new leadership to
submit the comments on this important matter. The most imminent and serious
concern is the relationship between the fast-track and long-term approach.
The dilemma is that an oversimplified procedure will not produce a
sustainable solution while a complicated procedure will not be fast! It's
been painfully felt the lack of overall coordination between IDN gTLDs and
IDN ccTLDs. It would be essential to avoid the problem in ccTLD name space.

Hong
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/private/idn-wg_atlarge-lists.icann.org/attachments/20080108/3b79e57a/attachment.html