[council] IRD report-- follow up actions

[Stéphane Van Gelder]

Thanks Ching,

The approach you suggest is dependent on a motion being made for Toronto to have the Council initiate an IR. If such a motion is to be made, please be mindful of the fast approaching deadline (Oct 9).

Thanks,

Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM NetNames France
----------------
Registry Relations and Strategy Director
NetNames
T: +33 (0)1 48 01 83 51
F: +33 (0)1 48 01 83 61


Le 5 oct. 2012 à 04:35, Ching Chiao [Registry.Asia] a écrit :

> Dear Stéphane, Councilors, 
> 
> I'd like to have your attention on the possible follow-up action items for IRD. 
> 
> In the co-signed GNSO-SSAC letter sent to the Board last month, we have mentioned that 
> 
> "requesting the (IRD) implementation plan time-lines and clarifying that any policy implications in implementing the recommendations will have to be considered by the GNSO Council".
> 
> As we are expecting the Board / Staff to provide time-lines, as well as to receive the regular updates from the Staff on the technical front (refer to recommendation 1 -- IRD submission and display AND 3 -- IRD access protocol). It is my belief that the Council can work in parallel and initiate the work on preparing the issue report for recommendation 2: 
> 
> "
> 2.  The GNSO Council and the SSAC should request a common Issue Report on translation and transliteration of contact information. The Issue Report should consider whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script. It should also consider who should bear the burden and who is in the best position to address these issues. The Issue Report should consider policy questions raised in the IRD-WG Final Report and should also recommend whether to start a policy development process (PDP) to address those questions. "
> 
> 
> 
> The RySG has agreed such approach and I am expecting further feedback from the RrSG as well. From an operational viewpoint, translation and/or transliteration of registration data does require clear responsibilities from registrants and registrars. As the Toronto meeting approaches, I feel that it's rather important to address this issue timely not only the ground works has been done for few years, but the result of the work should offer complete clarity for IDN gTLD. 
> 
> 
> 
> If you all agree, we would then ask the corresponding staff to prepare:
> 
> 1) IRD technical update
> 
> 2) Resolution of issue report on Rec. 2
> 
> 
> 
> for the Toronto meeting. 
> 
> 
> 
> Comments and suggestions are welcome. Thank you very much.
> 
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> 
> 
> Ching 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20121005/a6adf02e/attachment.html>