[council] RE: [gtld-council] The focus of GNSO Council involvement in IDN

[Sophia B]

Hi Bruce.

Could you pls calrify what you mean by similarity in the provisioning?

Thanks
Sophia

On 26/03/06, Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au> wrote:
>
> Hello Cary,
>
> I support the technical trial.
>
> The more options available to an existing or new TLD operator the better
> for now.
> (note that you can achieve a similar result as DNAMES with NS records at
> the provisioning layer - ie a single registry database can populate two
> zonefiles).
>
> Likewise from a policy point of view - now is the time to identify some
> options and issues.
> In general we should not restrict options unless there is an security or
> stability issue with implementing a particular option.
>
> In contrast we could begin to create some initial policies that allows
> us to move forward with the initial introduction of IDNs where some of
> the choices are initially limited, much as we did with the initial
> introduction of new gTLDs.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20060327/7cbc2406/attachment.html>