[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] WT5 Agenda, Work Plan & Consensus Call on Country & Territory Names - Please review before our call.

Fri Aug 17 02:48:21 UTC 2018

Countries don't "own" anything especially when it comes to generic names.

Farzaneh

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 9:09 PM Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com> wrote:

> That over 600 very valuable 2- and 3-letter combos that could be TLDs, and
> yet are reserved for no legitimate reason.  Countries certainly don't own
> LL codes that don't correspond to current countries.  And they also don't
> "own" the 3-letter codes that do show up on an ISO list, merely because
> they are on that list.
>
> It seems to me that many in this group are reopening the discussion as to
> all other 'geo' terms, and so these valuable names need to be thrown back
> into the mix as well.
>
>
> Mike Rodenbaugh
> RODENBAUGH LAW
> tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087
> http://rodenbaugh.com
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 8:22 PM, Nick Wenban-Smith <
> Nick.Wenban-Smith at nominet.uk> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mike
>>
>>
>>
>> Just to take the point here, the LL (all combinations 26 x 26 = 676 in
>> total, of which approaching half are already in use as ccTLDs) plus the ISO
>> 3166 alpha 3 LLL combinations which correspond to existing country and
>> territory names (less than 300 of the 17,500 odd LLL combinations) can’t in
>> any reasonable context be framed as ‘a large subset … reserved for no
>> reasons whatsoever’.
>>
>>
>>
>> Up until now there seems to be a strong consensus for the long and short
>> form country and territory names plus all the LL combinations and LLL
>> combinations which correspond to ISO 3166 to continue to be excluded from
>> any gTLD processes – for the reasons expressed on many threads up to this
>> point about sovereignty over national assets and whether these could fall
>> under domestic internet community policies (subsidiarity) or ICANN GNSO
>> policies.
>>
>>
>>
>> If we can’t settle on that as for the 2012 AGB round then there will be a
>> substantial opposition to any new gTLDs whatsoever so let’s not go there.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’ve said my piece on geo names falling below the hierarchy of capital
>> cities; I think those are fair game for legit non geo uses.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> Nick
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org> *On
>> Behalf Of *Mike Rodenbaugh
>> *Sent:* 10 August 2018 03:35
>> *To:* Edmon <edmon at dot.asia>
>> *Cc:* leonard obonyo via Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <
>> gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] WT5 Agenda, Work Plan & Consensus
>> Call on Country & Territory Names - Please review before our call.
>>
>>
>>
>> Note the first sentence in the RFC that Alexander cites:  "This memo
>> provides information for the Internet community. This memo
>>
>>    does not specify an Internet standard of any kind."
>>
>> Since this WT5 appears to want to reopen every "geographic" issue
>> imaginable, we need to add 2-character LL and 3-character geo TLDs to the
>> mix.  That is a large subset of potentially very valuable and useful names,
>> reserved for no legitimate reason whatsoever.
>>
>>
>>
>> Mike Rodenbaugh
>>
>> RODENBAUGH LAW
>>
>> tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087
>>
>> http://rodenbaugh.com
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 5:32 PM, Edmon <edmon at dot.asia> wrote:
>>
>> IDN "cc"TLDs already broke (free from) that also.
>> Edmon
>>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> From: Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com>
>> Sent: 10 August 2018 2:43:34 AM GMT+10:00
>> To: Alexander Schubert <alexander at schubert.berlin>
>> Cc: "gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] WT5 Agenda, Work Plan & Consensus Call
>> on Country & Territory Names - Please review before our call.
>>
>> What purpose does that distinction serve anyone?  I think it is
>> meaningless
>> and entirely unnecessary, depriving the world of many very valuable
>> two-character TLDs that have no reason to be sitting idle.
>>
>> Mike Rodenbaugh
>> RODENBAUGH LAW
>> tel/fax:  +1.415.738.8087
>> http://rodenbaugh.com
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 2:57 AM, Alexander Schubert <
>> alexander at schubert.berlin> wrote:
>>
>> > Dear Annabeth, dear Carlos,
>> >
>> > I agree with Annabeth. RFC 1591 (who doesn't know it by heart: check
>> > ietf.org/rfc/rfc1591.txt) cemented the one and only real differentiator
>> > in the DNS:
>> > That there are ccTLDs; operated and organized by authority  (which may
>> be
>> > deligated like in .tv)  of countries/nations. And that these are two
>> > character strings. That everything exceeding two characters are gTLDs.
>> >
>> > If we want to keep this (rather artificial - but to date well working)
>> > BASE order of the DNS; we should refrain from assigning two character
>> > gTLDs. It's a TINY amount of potentially available strings anyway.
>> >
>> > The two character vs more than two character distinction needs to be
>> > uphold; BOTH WAYS (no three letter ccTLDs).
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Alexander
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Sent from my Samsung device
>> >
>> >
>> > -------- Original message --------
>> > From: Annebeth Lange <annebeth.lange at norid.no>
>> > Date: 8/8/18 23:48 (GMT+02:00)
>> > To: Carlos Raul Gutierrez <carlosraul at gutierrez.se>
>> > Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
>> > Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] WT5 Agenda, Work Plan & Consensus
>> Call
>> > on Country & Territory Names - Please review before our call.
>> >
>> > Hi Carlos
>> >
>> > Could I ask you for one clarification? If we open up for some
>> > 2-letter/letter combinations in the GNSO process, they will
>> automatically
>> > be gTLDs. You don’t think that will disturb the distinction we have had
>> > from the beginning that 2-characters are ccTLDs and 3 or more gTLDs?
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> > Annebeth
>> >
>> >
>> > Annebeth B Lange
>> > Special Adviser International Policy
>> > UNINETT Norid AS
>> > Phone: +47 959 11 559
>> > Mail: annebeth.lange at norid.no
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 8. aug. 2018 kl. 22:43 skrev Carlos Raul Gutierrez <
>> > carlosraul at gutierrez.se>:
>> >
>> > My comments to today's call:
>> >
>> > 1. “The ICANN Community may want to consider whether a future process
>> > should be established or determine if, when, and how specific interested
>> > parties, such as relevant government authorities, may apply for country
>> and
>> > territory names” This paragraph is the only sensible part of a
>> > forward-looking recommendation and should/could be redrafted. I wonder
>> if
>> > it could be enhanced, or if the only way to go is deletion as CW
>> > suggested.   A shorter more concise version? A more “liberal” version?
>> How
>> > about: “ICANN may consider applications by specific interested parties,
>> > such as relevant authorities, of strings that are not current or future
>> > countries or territories.”  Ps: The text in Recommendation 1 “reserving
>> ALL
>> > two character letter letter” combinations-  can be enhanced.  I wonder
>> if
>> > it’s truly ALL, or if the potential for future countries and potential
>> > combinations is really much less broad? Could that be qualified
>> somehow? I
>> > can’t think of a future .xx or .ññ country or territory and maybe we
>> could
>> > tweak the language to open this a bit and garner broad community
>> support to
>> > move forward.
>> >
>> > 2. Other than recommendation #1, I object strongly the text to "keep geo
>> > names from the delegation" in any other recommedation, unless a clear
>> > rationale is added to the recommendation
>> >
>> >
>> > 3. I hope no draft goes out before a substantial non-AGB names
>> discussion
>> > has taken place, including to geographic related, cultural, linguistic
>> and
>> > other social  elements, ,like Apache Nation
>> >
>> >
>> > Best regards
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---
>> > Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
>> > carlosraul at gutierrez.se
>> > +506 8837 7176
>> > Aparatado 1571-1000
>> > COSTA RICA
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > El 2018-08-08 05:09, Emily Barabas escribió:
>> >
>> > Dear Work Track members,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Please find attached suggested revisions to the draft recommendations
>> > shared yesterday. Please note that this revised text includes
>> > clarifications and typo corrections only. Feedback on some of the more
>> > substantive issues will be discussed further on today's call.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> >
>> > Emily
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > *From: *Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces at icann.org> on
>> > behalf of Martin Sutton <martin at brandregistrygroup.org>
>> > *Date: *Monday, 6 August 2018 at 14:45
>> > *To: *"gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org" <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org>
>> > *Subject: *[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] WT5 Agenda, Work Plan & Consensus Call
>> > on Country & Territory Names - Please review before our call.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Dear Work Track members,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Please find below the proposed agenda for the WT5 call on Wednesday 8
>> > August at 13:00 UTC:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 1. Welcome/Agenda Review/SOI Updates
>> > 2. Review of Consensus Call Process and Work Plan
>> > 3. Consensus Call on Country and Territory Names
>> > 4. Wrap Up - Non-AGB Terms
>> > 5. AOB
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On our upcoming call, the leadership team will introduce a work plan
>> aimed
>> > at wrapping up WT5's work and delivering an Initial Report by the end of
>> > September. In maintaining this timeline, the leadership is seeking to
>> > ensure that Work Track 5 inputs can be effectively integrated into the
>> work
>> > of the broader New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group in time
>> for
>> > delivery of the PDP's Final Report. A copy of the work plan is attached.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > As outlined in the work plan, the leadership team will be holding a
>> series
>> > of consensus calls on potential recommendations to include in WT5's
>> Initial
>> > Report. These will be introduced in clusters, with the first set of
>> > recommendations focusing on country and territory names. The draft
>> > recommendations, which will be discussed on Wednesday, are attached.
>> *Work
>> > Track members are encouraged to review and provide feedback on these
>> draft
>> > recommendations prior to the call on Wednesday*. The leadership team
>> will
>> > officially open the consensus call on this topic following Wednesday's
>> > call. For more information on the consensus call process that will be
>> > followed, please see the GNSO Working Group Guidelines, Section 3.6:
>> >
>> https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/annex-1-
>> > gnso-wg-guidelines-18jun18-en.pdf [gnso.icann.org]
>> > <
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_sites_default_files_file_field-2Dfile-2Dattach_annex-2D1-2Dgnso-2Dwg-2Dguidelines-2D18jun18-2Den.pdf&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=mBQzlSaM6eYCHFBU-v48zs-QSrjHB0aWmHuE4X4drzI&m=NVtIpaem-VqCNPYPOoZhv9ofczsIO-e3-mM3UoaoTMA&s=g15pYjxotpxtjftphXYKDMOR0bso7mS5i2CXTIVfcww&e=
>> >
>> > .
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > If you need a dial out for the upcoming call or would like to send an
>> > apology, please email gnso-secs at icann.org.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > WT5 Co-Leads
>> >
>> > Annebeth Lange
>> >
>> > Javier Rua
>> >
>> > Olga Cavalli
>> >
>> > Martin Sutton
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended
>> solely
>> > for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged
>> > information and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not
>> > the intended recipient of this message or their agent, or if this
>> message
>> > has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender
>> by
>> > reply email and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are
>> > not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use,
>> > dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its attachments is
>> > strictly prohibited.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
>> > Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
>> >
>> > <Draft Recommendations - country and territory names - v4.pdf>
>> >
>> > <Draft Recommendations - country and territory names - v4.docx>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
>> > Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
>> > Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 mailing list
> Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20180816/919c5160/attachment-0001.html>