[UA-discuss] Would this be in scope or not?

[Edmon Chung]

Agree with Ram and Rich. Adding that once a good solution set is found from the platform it will be in scope to then advocate that to the broader community, which is another awareness function.

So I see our job in a few phases:
1. raise awareness of the issues
2. facilitate the convening of parties to identify solution sets (the actual development of the solution may be beyond the immediate ICANN "venue")
3. once reasonably sound solution(s) are identified promote and advocate such solutions to address the issues

Edmon


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org] On
> Behalf Of Richard Merdinger
> Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 5:31 AM
> To: Ram Mohan; Edward Lewis; ua-discuss at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] Would this be in scope or not?
> 
> I'm going to agree with Ram that the most important thing that ICANN do at present
> is help in the essential Universal *awareness* elements of universal acceptance as
> well as with facilitation with the coordinating functions. - RSM
> 
> > It's not clear to me that ICANN could drive a standard handling of
> mailbox names, I think that would be quixotic.  Then again maybe tackling mailbox
> names isn't necessary, maybe all we really need to do is get clients to work with an
> expanded definition of what a mailbox name is.
> (Lurking in me is the thought of "variants" and how they might cause trouble in
> mailbox names if there's no canonical form as defined in IDNA
> 2008 for domain
> 
> [[Ram]] The goal would not be for ICANN to drive either the standard or adoption.
> Instead, the goal would be for ICANN to help improve awareness of the problem
> space, and then provide a coordination function so appropriate parties can determine
> solution sets for the defined problems.