[arabic-vip] High level status for domain names (was Re: docstructure for dicusssion)

[Sarmad Hussain]

Dear Andrew,

Yes, I see what you are suggesting.

So, yes they are similar in a context.  However, there is a logical
difference between the two types.  In the former (registry-driven), the
label and all its variants are in the same category (reserved or allowed).
In the latter (registrant-driven), a sub-set of variants may be in one
category (reserved) whilst another subset may be in a different one (e.g.
delegated).  

Could that have implications on technical implementation?

Regards,
Sarmad



-----Original Message-----
From: arabic-vip-bounces at icann.org [mailto:arabic-vip-bounces at icann.org] On
Behalf Of ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 11:48 AM
To: arabic-vip at icann.org
Subject: Re: [arabic-vip] High level status for domain names (was Re:
docstructure for dicusssion)

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 11:42:32AM -0700, Dr.Sarmad Hussain wrote:
> We need to find non-overlapping terminology for the registry-motivated and
> registrant-motivated label decisions.

I'm not entirely sure I see why the motivation is what matters.  I
would suggest that the same result (block or reserve or whatever)
could be motivated by more than one desire; but there is a technical
state in the registry which results (just as there is more than one
way a name can get allocated and delegated, but the result is an entry
in the registry).  

So, if a registrant wants something to be blocked, or if the registry
wants something to be blocked, the same state of affairs comes to be
in the registry; but the origins of that state might be different.

(I make this suggestion only in an effort to reduce the number of
special terms we have to define.)

Best regards,

Andrew


-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com