[IDN-WG] Fwd: [APAC-Discuss] [At-Large] Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings PC

[Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond]

Dear Rinalia,

thank you for your follow-up on this. The problem with starting a 5 day
vote on this today is that this is the week when people are travelling
to Toronto. They might miss the vote in their accumulated email.
I note that the comment period closes on 18 October. Couldn't this wait
for a F2F vote in our Thursday wrap-up?
Kind regards,

Olivier

On 05/10/2012 04:07, Rinalia Abdul Rahim wrote:
> Dear Olivier,
>
> The drafted *ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection
> Criteria, Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations* (pasted
> below) has received no objections on all the ALAC and At-Large lists. 
> I have conferred with Edmon Chung and we concur that the statement is
> ready for an ALAC vote.  I am passing this matter over to you and
> staff for onward ALAC action (i.e., vote).
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rinalia
>
>  
>
> *ALAC Statement on the Draft IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria,
> Requirements and Processes Policy Recommendations*
>
>  
>
> The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International
> Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working
> Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations
> on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes
> for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list.  We note that the
> recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working
> Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the
> learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track
> Process over the past few years.
>
>  
>
> We wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs,
> including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country
> code levels.  We believe that IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity
> and multilingualism on the Internet. 
>
>  
>
> We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of
> variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which
> points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are
> still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later. 
>
>  
>
> We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the
> issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely
> manner.  Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm
> that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label
> Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and
> applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching
> principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root
> Zone, which is shared by all Internet users.
>
>  
>
> END
>
>  
>
>  
>
>

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html