[CPWG] [Ext] Re: 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question

Mon Dec 5 12:40:46 UTC 2022

Hi all,

Thanks for copying me in to this discussion. We have a webinar planned for Dec 14 where we will present the ODA. Look forward to continue the discussion.

Regards

Goran Marby

From: "lists at christopherwilkinson.eu" <lists at christopherwilkinson.eu>
Reply-To: Christopher Wilkinson <cw at christopherwilkinson.eu>
Date: Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 10:24 PM
To: "cpwg at icann.org" <cpwg at icann.org>
Subject: [Ext] Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question

Good evening :
Our recent discussion of Göran Marby's comment at the IGF gives rise, to my mind, to several considerations.
The GNSO Sub Pro report on new gTLDs [gnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/final-report-newgtld-subsequent-procedures-pdp-20jan21-en.pdf__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4D3XMHj5Q$>  (pp 400+, see Annexes I & J) was issued in January 2021, nearly two years ago. It did not respond to the issues raised by the Dissenting Opinions posted.  ALAC has also sent to the Board extensive and detailed Advice on behalf of At Large, requiring several changes in the PDP Report's policy recommendations. Neither the Board nor GNSO have replied to or acted upon the ALAC Advice, albeit available on the ICANN website, translated into all our working languages.
Consequently I consider that the proposed ODP procedure is premature. I am sure that when the outstanding requests for amendments and other criticisms of the PDP Report have been taken fully into account, the eventual ODP work would be substantially changed. Meanwhile the announced ODP risks wasting a lot of our time.

Returning to the IGF and Göran's comment, I suggest that the context IS highly relevant, in relation to ICANN's obligations to the international community, in several respects.

The international, global, interest in the DNS is NOT limited to IDNs.  But the PDP Report provides minimal extension of protection to geographical names. Specifically for Africa, there are large populations in vast areas who are currently restricted to a single local ccTLD.
In large parts of Asia, idem.
The previous Round of new gTLDs was very largely engrossed with additional English language names. That enhanced, and did not attenuate, the English language bias in the DNS. It has also been to a large extent an economic failure.
I have yet to hear any explanation or apology from the then Board Chair or CEO. We are still dealing with the fallout: lack of universal acceptance and concentration of the Registry/Registrar business through vertical integration and the acquisition of otherwise non-viable Registries. This was foreseeable at the time, and not acted  upon by GNSO or the Board.
Furthermore, should one wish to achieve the global balance, hinted at by Göran Marby's remarks, one would need significant Applicant Support, not only financial but also technical and human resources. The PDP was having none of this. If applicant support is as limited next time as it was last time, it risks comparable failure. This is also addressed in the ALAC Advice.
Regards

Christopher Wilkinson

On 3 Dec 2022, at 18:39, Jonathan Zuck via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org<mailto:cpwg at icann.org>> wrote:

Of course, in the context of “new round enthusiasts” trying to motivate others, and using the prospect of IDNs to do so, it’s also understandable and carries with it the risks Jeff outlined.

From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org<mailto:cpwg at icann.org>>
Date: Friday, December 2, 2022 at 1:36 PM
To: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com<mailto:michele at blacknight.com>>, Avri <avri at doria.org<mailto:avri at doria.org>>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris at yahoo.com<mailto:b_jouris at yahoo.com>>
Cc: Cpwg <cpwg at icann.org<mailto:cpwg at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question
Sounds like Michele and I are in agreement again this year.....wow, everyone remember 2022 :)

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Founder & CEO
JJN Solutions, LLC
Jeff at JJNSolutions.com<mailto:Jeff at JJNSolutions.com>
+1.202.549.5079
Http://www.jjnsolutions.com [jjnsolutions.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__Http:/www.jjnsolutions.com__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4BaIW1FgQ$>

________________________________
From: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com<mailto:michele at blacknight.com>>
Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 11:59 AM
To: Jeff Neuman <jeff at jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff at jjnsolutions.com>>; Avri <avri at doria.org<mailto:avri at doria.org>>; Bill Jouris <b_jouris at yahoo.com<mailto:b_jouris at yahoo.com>>
Cc: Cpwg <cpwg at icann.org<mailto:cpwg at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question

Context is everything.

In the context of the IGF it makes perfect sense that Goran and other talking heads from ICANN would be pushing the global internet mantra.

I’ve no idea if Goran’s comments were scripted or off the cuff, but I’d give him the benefit of the doubt here – due to the context of the remarks.

From a technical perspective it’s very clear that IDNs still face a LOT of challenges – the user experience with using them is far from ideal, though it has improved over the past 10 years.

The UASG’s recent paper on web hosting tools underlines this:
https://uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular-web-hosting-tools-are-not-ua-ready/ [uasg.tech]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/uasg.tech/2022/10/testing-reveals-popular-web-hosting-tools-are-not-ua-ready/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4CajPqH_w$>

regards

Michele

--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/ [blacknight.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.blacknight.com/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4DH8nAiuQ$>
https://blacknight.blog/ [blacknight.blog]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/blacknight.blog/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4DghxCVCA$>
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ [michele.blog]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/michele.blog/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4Dp9or1Yw$>
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ [ceo.hosting]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/ceo.hosting/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4Dg81-BOg$>
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Jeff Neuman via CPWG <cpwg at icann.org<mailto:cpwg at icann.org>>
Date: Friday, 2 December 2022 at 16:10
To: Avri <avri at doria.org<mailto:avri at doria.org>>, Bill Jouris <b_jouris at yahoo.com<mailto:b_jouris at yahoo.com>>
Cc: Cpwg <cpwg at icann.org<mailto:cpwg at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources.
I agree.  Not the best choice of words in a global context, but probably made sense for where Goran was at the time.

But statements like this one can come back to bite the organization in the future.

Two examples,

the GNSO SubPro Working Group found that there should be certain preferences for IDN gTLD Applications when queuing them up for evaluation….(There is a formula built in to ensure that).  But statements like this could increase the demand on ICANN to move faster with a round only dedicated to IDN gTLDs.  But of course this was NOT accepted by the GNSO though it was discussed thoroughly.

IDN gTLDs present extremely complex problems with respect to variants at both the top and second levels.  This is becoming painfully clear to the IDN ePDP working group which has been tackling these issues now for quite some time and still has a long way to go.  At the past GNSO meeting the GNSO agreed to give the IDN ePDP much more time to complete its work which is now in 2 phases.  The first phase deals with most of the top-level issues, while the second phase deals with the second level.  The Top-Level phase is supposed to come out with an initial report in April, but I am not sure if it will meet that deadline.  But even if it does, we are talking about another year for a final report only on phase 1.  Phase 2 will not be completed until 2025.

So, although the rest of the process is moving forward with SubPro, there is a very real probability that some of the IDN gTLD issues may not be resolved by the time the new gTLD program is kicked off.

Statements like this one, however, may cause people to argue that no new round should be launched until all of the IDN issues are resolved and would point to statements like this one from Goran as justification.  After all, if the goal is to launch IDN gTLDs in the next round, how can you launch a next round if the IDN issues are not yet resolved?

Some food for thought.

<image001.png>

Jeffrey J. Neuman
Founder & CEO
JJN Solutions, LLC
p: +1.202.549.5079
E: jeff at jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff at jjnsolutions.com>
http://jjnsolutions.com [jjnsolutions.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/jjnsolutions.com/__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4DHyWKmjQ$>

From: CPWG <cpwg-bounces at icann.org<mailto:cpwg-bounces at icann.org>> On Behalf Of Avri via CPWG
Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 2:40 AM
To: Bill Jouris <b_jouris at yahoo.com<mailto:b_jouris at yahoo.com>>
Cc: Cpwg <cpwg at icann.org<mailto:cpwg at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [CPWG] 2022 IGF & New gTLD Question

+1

avri

On Dec 2, 2022 at 10:26 AM, <Bill Jouris via CPWG<mailto:cpwg at icann.org>> wrote:
I read these remarks as simply saying that we are not doing another round now simply because we need more English language gTLDs.  We are doing it because we are now in a position to offer gTLDs which go beyond the English alphabet.

This does not seem like a policy statement, just a recognition of the timing and motivation of a new round.

Bill Jouris.

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android [go.onelink.me]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4AnVQkQlA$>

On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:18 PM, mike palage.com [palage.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/palage.com__;!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4BI39M92g$> via CPWG
<cpwg at icann.org<mailto:cpwg at icann.org>> wrote:
Hello All,

This week I have seen many ICANN community members participating, in person and virtually, at IGF 2022.  Today during the IGF 2022 Town Hall, "Launch of the Coalition for Digital Africa" there was a statement by Goran which made me do a double take. In response to a questions about new gTLDs Goran stated that "[t]he intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right."

I have included the full scribed text below along with a link to the YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4 [youtube.com]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXcWW74qG4*20__;JQ!!PtGJab4!5ohgu_ip-8nV9hnolce84Dk-sz_Yz9zTMiac4vq4kcRX721vMcbR9NTrYuMw22tzzoyMHJoy5XizZCyLfmlmQSsDi4BS2op0Fg$>at 4:34:42)

When exactly did this change in policy happen, I must have missed it. Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

Best regards,

Michael

"One more thing.  One other small thing that I can do, and it's one of the biggest things we have done in a long time.  We are going in the process where we want to have more top level domains, domain names and we are right now in the process after a long period of time from ICANN community work, where we -- on the 14th, we are going to start about the Next Generation of top level domains.  The intention of the top level domains is not to have more English top level domains where you read left to right.  And the intention is to make sure the top level domains are for regions, Africa is one we would like to talk about.  We would like to see more African top level domains operated here in Africa and that support your businesses and community and lives."

_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org<mailto:CPWG at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org<mailto:CPWG at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20221205/9218b607/attachment-0001.html>