[Idngwg] meeting notes from 08 September 2016

[Jian C. Zhang]

Hi, guys,

Sorry for the late notice. I am still in work for an urgent meeting tomorrow morning. So I could not take today's teleconference. I will hear the recording later. Hope you go well. 



Jian C. Zhang
Director, Policy & Public Affairs
KNET, Co., Ltd.
 
 
From: Sarmad Hussain
Date: 2016-09-22 18:55
To: idngwg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Idngwg] meeting notes from 08 September 2016
Thank you Edmon and Dennis.  
 
Please find attached the latest document for the call right now.
 
Regards,
Sarmad
 
 
From: Edmon Chung [mailto:edmon at registry.asia] 
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 3:41 PM
To: 'Tan Tanaka, Dennis' <dtantanaka at verisign.com>; Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain at icann.org>; idngwg at icann.org
Subject: RE: [Idngwg] meeting notes from 08 September 2016
 
Proposed 2 Option approach for recommendation 7:
 
 
Recommendation 7:
Code point listings must be placed in the IANA Repository for IDN TLD Practices Label Generation Ruleset (RFC 7940) format together with any rules applied to the registration of names containing those code points, before any such registration may be accepted.
 
[Option 1:] Registries with legacy IDN tables are encouraged to transition to the LGR format.
 
[Option 2:] Registries with legacy IDN tables should also publish their tables in the standard LGR format.
 
Registries are encouraged to publish and/or maintain IDN tables in other user-friendly formats such as in tabular form or searchable form as well.
 
 
Edmon
 
 
 
From: idngwg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:idngwg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Tan Tanaka, Dennis
Sent: Thursday, 22 September 2016 01:38 AM
To: Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain at icann.org>; idngwg at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Idngwg] meeting notes from 08 September 2016
 
Please find enclosed proposed revision to recommendation re: reference LGRs.
 
A few thoughts about the new version that we should discuss tomorrow:
-          New version incorporates modifications to an IDN table, not only new IDN tables.
-          There should be a section where we define what the wg means with security and stability issues. I found definitions from the GNSO on these terms but we should decide whether these are the right ones to use.
 
-Dennis
 
From: <idngwg-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain at icann.org>
Date: Saturday, September 17, 2016 at 10:39 PM
To: "idngwg at icann.org" <idngwg at icann.org>
Subject: [Idngwg] meeting notes from 08 September 2016
 
Dear All,
 
Please find attached the summary of our meeting on 8 September 2016.  Please let me know in case of any changes.  
 
We have the following action items:
 
S. No.
Action Items 
Owner
1
Review second part of recommendation 7 in Section 2.3 to suggest stronger language in addition to the current language as an option for public comment.
EC
2
Review the last sentence of Revised new recommendation re:LGR in Section 2.4 to call for registries to provide further details and justification for cases which may pose a security and stability issue to clarify that these issues do not occur.
DT
3
For the new recommendation on registry collaboration at the end of Section 2.4., update to include script based tables, e.g. by introducing reference to RFC 5646 for language/script tags.  
MT
4
For the new recommendation on registry collaboration at the end of Section 2.4., suggest if this recommendation should be included for public feedback (or is not needed and be taken out).
ALL
5
IDN Variants, Section 2.5 should be reviewed for discussion next time.
ALL
 
The attached notes and the recording of the meeting are available at the IDNGWG wiki page at https://community.icann.org/display/IDN/IDN+Implementation+Guidelines[community.icann.org].   
 
Next meeting will be on 22 September, 11am UTC.  
 
Regards,
Sarmad
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/idngwg/attachments/20160922/7390d4af/attachment-0001.html>