[CPWG] [GTLD-WG] URGENT - WT5 proposal for 3-letter country codes

[Satish Babu]

I support this formulation as well.








satish



On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 3:25 AM, carlos dionisio aguirre <
carlosaguirre62 at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Dear all,  for me, the best option in the 3 letter country codes, till
> now, is  the Carlos Raul Gutierrez proposal, for that my position is in
> this sense.
> Im waiting voices from my region, who has not position on this point yet.
>
> Carlos Dionisio Aguirre
>
>
> Enviado desde mi smartphone Samsung Galaxy.
>
>
> -------- Mensaje original --------
> De: Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
> Fecha: 11/8/18 15:44 (GMT-03:00)
> Para: CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>, Olivier Crépin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>,
> Jonathan Zuck <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>
> Cc: Javier Rúa-Jovet <javrua at gmail.com>
> Asunto: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] URGENT - WT5 proposal for 3-letter country codes
>
> Hi everyone
>
> If you have been following the discussions in WT5 you will see that there
> has been a lot of controversy over the GNSO consensus process on Country
> and Territory Names and how best to come to a decision on each of the key
> issues that are being discussed.
>
> With regards to an agreement over 3-letter country codes, Carlos Raul
> Gutierrez has proposed the following suggestion to help this process move
> forward, I believe we should consider his proposal as a reasonable
> compromise considering all the discussion that has taken place and send our
> support (or otherwise) to our ALAC co-Chair. The ALAC views could be
> coordinated by the CPWG leads but will be required *by Tuesday??*.
>
> *This is urgent, as it appears that consensus calls will be received by the
> co-Chairs during the week  and as they will have to prepare for the next
> WT5 meeting on the 22nd, it would be good to include an ALAC opinion as
> well. *
>
> “Dear Annebeth,
>
> As you have heard me (too) many times before, I admire the track record of
> preceding, clearly focused public interest 3 letter geo-TLDs, like the ones
> from Catalonia in Spain, Brittany's in France, and Serbia's 3 letter TLDs
>
> Now that I re-stated my rationale for such a clear-cut public interest case
> in an email to Rosalia (for geo use ONLY, accessible -i.e. cheap- and
> non-profit), I hereby submit to the WT my final revised language
> suggestion, which is ONLY applicable for 3-Letter codes. It would
> substitute the following final paragraph in the relevant section which
> deals with 3-Letter codes: “*The SubPro may want to consider recommending
> whether any future application/revision/delegation process to be
> established (either generic or restricted to the Geographic categories
> only), should determine if, when, and how specific interested parties, such
> as relevant public international, national or sub-national public
> authorities, may apply for country and territory names*"
>
> My suggestion for a FORWARD looking option is:
>
> “*ICANN may only consider applications of ISO 3166-1 Alpha 3 Letter Codes
> submitted by relevant governmental authorities, ccTLD managers and public
> interest/public benefit entities*.”
>
> This paragraph is, in my view, a sensible part of a forward-looking
> recommendation that could go ahead with broader WT consensus. And if it
> does not, please make sure it is recorded as an objection against a
> permanent restriction of the delegation of the ISO 3-Letter list.
>
> Thanks to all,
>
> Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez"
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20180812/63572418/attachment.html>