IDN Forums - Internationalized Domain Names  
Home | Advertise on idnforums | Premium Membership

Go Back   IDN Forums - Internationalized Domain Names > IDN Discussions > General Discussion

General Discussion Feel free to talk about anything and everything in this board.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 06:38 PM
Rubber Duck's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Czech Republic (For those of you from USA = Chechnya)
Posts: 15,929
iTrader: (59)
Rep Power: 4510
Rubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura about
GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Final Draft – Last Revised 31 January 2008

http://www.gnso.icann.org/drafts/ccn...ds-31jan08.pdf

Perhaps if members were to read this and inwardly digest, we could cut down on the number of dumb arsed questions being ask?


Actually, it is not so much the questions but the wild unsubstantiated assertion being made that are really starting to get to me!
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 07:19 PM
g's Avatar
g g is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 986
iTrader: (10)
Rep Power: 844
g is on a distinguished roadg is on a distinguished roadg is on a distinguished roadg is on a distinguished roadg is on a distinguished roadg is on a distinguished road
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

after going through tons of most sophisticated abbreviations and using dictionary to translate some terms......

what the hell is going on ?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have only one stupid question

Are IDNs for english speaking people ?

Arab , russians, chinese , japanese need to know what conspiracy are you ugly bastard preparing for them!

if it is an arabic food , then we wanna participate in your apportionmentahkdhfajdhads

qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq
__________________
two traffic and revenue persian IDNs for sale , click here
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 07:26 PM
Drewbert's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,091
iTrader: (20)
Rep Power: 0
Drewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgy
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Look's like they'll be fighting tooth and nail to ensure that none of the IDN ccTLD's become virtual gTLD's like .nu .cc and .ws did. I see a "registrant must reside in the ccTLD's territory" rule being pushed for.

It also looks like the gTLD's will be pushing to get some of their aliases launched in unison with the IDN ccTLD's. That'd be good.
__________________
It's all jaded style to me.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 07:36 PM
g's Avatar
g g is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 986
iTrader: (10)
Rep Power: 844
g is on a distinguished roadg is on a distinguished roadg is on a distinguished roadg is on a distinguished roadg is on a distinguished roadg is on a distinguished road
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

thanks Drewbert for clarification
__________________
two traffic and revenue persian IDNs for sale , click here
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 07:45 PM
jacksonm's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,843
iTrader: (26)
Rep Power: 984
jacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to jacksonm Send a message via Skype™ to jacksonm
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubber Duck
Actually, it is not so much the questions but the wild unsubstantiated assertion being made that are really starting to get to me!

Have some Gin :-)

.
__________________
.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 08:05 PM
domain_trader's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 144
iTrader: (0)
Rep Power: 457
domain_trader is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbert
It also looks like the gTLD's will be pushing to get some of their aliases launched in unison with the IDN ccTLD's. That'd be good.
There is no mention of aliasing in the document. They seem to be dealing with the issue of new gTLD registries alongside new ccTLD registries. ICANN are still avoiding the question that we all want answered.
__________________
www.IDNtraders.com - register now to win an IDN! It's free to enter!
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 08:13 PM
555 555 is offline
ком.ком コム.コム
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,141
iTrader: (33)
Rep Power: 1682
555 has disabled reputation
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by domain_trader
There is no mention of aliasing in the document.
I Also use ctrl+f sometimes.
__________________
ロレックス.com رولكس.com Ролекс.com Порше.com 路易威登.com 必胜宅急送.com 香港迪士尼乐园.com Hermès.com Nestlé.com
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 08:21 PM
Drewbert's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,091
iTrader: (20)
Rep Power: 0
Drewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgy
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by domain_trader
There is no mention of aliasing in the document. They seem to be dealing with the issue of new gTLD registries alongside new ccTLD registries. ICANN are still avoiding the question that we all want answered.
No mention, but if you read between the lines, the GNSO wants to release some IDN gTLD's at the same time the "fast track" IDN ccTLD's come out. NO WAY could they get fresh gTLD's approved in that amount of time, so this means some aliased gTLD's for the emcumbent TLD operators.

In other words, "if the ccTLD's get some aliases and we don't, we're gonna hold our breath until we get what we want".
__________________
It's all jaded style to me.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 08:35 PM
domain_trader's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 144
iTrader: (0)
Rep Power: 457
domain_trader is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbert
No mention, but if you read between the lines, the GNSO wants to release some IDN gTLD's at the same time the "fast track" IDN ccTLD's come out. NO WAY could they get fresh gTLD's approved in that amount of time, so this means some aliased gTLD's for the emcumbent TLD operators.

In other words, "if the ccTLD's get some aliases and we don't, we're gonna hold our breath until we get what we want".
Well they are fond of using the term "new gTLDs" in the document, so interpret that any way you will. I'm also not sure why new gTLDs would take longer to introduce than ccTLDs, but anyway.

I'll be looking forward to the next stage of this process where hopefully they start openly addressing the issue of aliasing. Then maybe we will get some clarity on all of this. What can you expect from an agency headed by a lawyer?
__________________
www.IDNtraders.com - register now to win an IDN! It's free to enter!
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 08:40 PM
jacksonm's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,843
iTrader: (26)
Rep Power: 984
jacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to jacksonm Send a message via Skype™ to jacksonm
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by domain_trader
I'll be looking forward to the next stage of this process where hopefully they start openly addressing the issue of aliasing.

Clearly there are conflicting interests regarding aliasing. They can't just refuse to respond to the number one question the public has without a damned good reason.

.
__________________
.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 08:53 PM
Drewbert's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,091
iTrader: (20)
Rep Power: 0
Drewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgy
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by domain_trader
I'm also not sure why new gTLDs would take longer to introduce than ccTLDs, but anyway.
Because the new gTLD process IS long and drawn out. The "fasttrack" ccTLD is aimed to get around this.

But if you're having trouble reading between the lines, and even once I explain it you still don't get it, not much I can do, really.

Quote:
What can you expect from an agency headed by a lawyer?
Actually if you looked into the history of PDT, you would see that he's stood up for Joe Blow registrant a number of times in the past. He's more akin to John Berryhill than your average "registrants are all cybersquatters" IP attorney, so be careful casting aspersions in his direction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacksonm
Clearly there are conflicting interests regarding aliasing. They can't just refuse to respond to the number one question the public has without a damned good reason.

.
True, but they're not going to admit that reason are they?

Like I said before, what Verisign wants, Verisign usually gets.

And us "speculators" need to lay low and let Verisign do their stuff behind the scenes. The last thing they want is some loudmouth IDN'er standing up in a meeting demanding aliasing because he has a bunch of .com's he wants to turn into gold. That would be a catalyst for disaster.
__________________
It's all jaded style to me.

Last edited by Drewbert; 8th February 2008 at 08:56 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 09:08 PM
jacksonm's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,843
iTrader: (26)
Rep Power: 984
jacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to jacksonm Send a message via Skype™ to jacksonm
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbert
And us "speculators" need to lay low and let Verisign do their stuff behind the scenes. The last thing they want is some loudmouth IDN'er standing up in a meeting demanding aliasing because he has a bunch of .com's he wants to turn into gold. That would be a catalyst for disaster.

Good advice.

I actually considered going to Delhi until I seen the hotel rates. But they were on an ICANN newsletter - I didn't check them independently. Ah well, Amsterdam seems like a better destination anyway...

.
__________________
.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 09:46 PM
Drewbert's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,091
iTrader: (20)
Rep Power: 0
Drewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgy
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacksonm

Ah well, Amsterdam seems like a better destination anyway...

.
Word.
__________________
It's all jaded style to me.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 09:51 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 7,864
iTrader: (60)
Rep Power: 2203
bwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enough
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbert
Look's like they'll be fighting tooth and nail to ensure that none of the IDN ccTLD's become virtual gTLD's like .nu .cc and .ws did. I see a "registrant must reside in the ccTLD's territory" rule being pushed for.

It also looks like the gTLD's will be pushing to get some of their aliases launched in unison with the IDN ccTLD's. That'd be good.
QUOTE
What precedence should be given to ccTLDs in the IDN implementation process?

Proposed GNSO response: There should be no formal precedence given to IDN
ccTLDs over IDN gTLDs or vice versa. In the event that IDN gTLDs are ready
before IDN ccTLDs, the interests of the IDN community should be protected by
liberal use of the objection mechanism proposed in the new gTLD process (see
reference 5 above). Likewise if IDN ccTLDs are ready for deployment before
IDN gTLDs there should be an equivalent objection mechanism available for the
rest of the community. END QUOTE
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 10:24 PM
Rubber Duck's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Czech Republic (For those of you from USA = Chechnya)
Posts: 15,929
iTrader: (59)
Rep Power: 4510
Rubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura about
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by domain_trader
There is no mention of aliasing in the document. They seem to be dealing with the issue of new gTLD registries alongside new ccTLD registries. ICANN are still avoiding the question that we all want answered.
Which fucking document were you reading? 2/10. Go back and do the exercise again!
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 8th February 2008, 11:51 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 7,864
iTrader: (60)
Rep Power: 2203
bwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enough
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

A GLIMMER OF HOPE THAT THINGS ARE MOVING ALONG ALBEIT SLOWLY...

QUOTED FROM PAGE 3:
ICANN has been criticized heavily for taking too long to implement IDN TLDs. Those of us familiar with ICANN understand that such criticism is directed at all of us because ICANN is not the legal corporation nor the staff that supports that corporation but rather those that are a part of the bottom-up processes upon which ICANN the corporation is based.

Recognizing this, we all need to assume responsibility for the long delays in implementing IDN TLDs and do everything in our power to expedite the process going forward. Regardless of how much rationalizing we can do to explain why it has taken so long, we are near the point where reasons for further delays are nearly gone. END QUOTE
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 9th February 2008, 01:37 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,806
iTrader: (19)
Rep Power: 685
Giant is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by domain_trader
... I'm also not sure why new gTLDs would take longer to introduce than ccTLDs, ...
Not sure why? Read more, listen and learn from the pros.
__________________
@

Dot Com is King. IDN.com will soon be king.
@
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 9th February 2008, 07:05 AM
domain_trader's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 144
iTrader: (0)
Rep Power: 457
domain_trader is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giant
Not sure why? Read more, listen and learn from the pros.
As I said, there is *nothing* that suggests that aliasing by existing gTLDs will be allowed. There is no reading between the lines on this matter. It doesn't rule it out either, but it does introduce a few complications, such as this one:

"An IDN gTLD registry should limit the degree of script mixing and have a
limit for the number of scripts allowed for its domain names."

What does this mean for the ability of Verisign to produce variant strings across languages?

Then we have this statement:

"In all IDN gTLD applications, the applicant should adequately document
its consultations with local language authorities and/or communities."

How long do you think that process will take if Verisign has to consult with every language community before it can introduce a .com variant?

Finally, the document is not encouraging a gTLD to have it strings implemented at the same time as ccTLDs. The matter is this: ICANN simply can't preference one registry over another as a matter of equity. In other words, a gTLD application will be treated with the same attention as a ccTLD application.

Again, I'm not putting a dampener on things, just saying that this particular document does not resolve the issue that everyone is waiting to hear, and actually may raise a few stumbling blocks. If you disagree with that, then I'm happy to have a civil debate that refers to the actual document in question

But everyone is welcome to their own interpretation and opinion, even us non-'pros'.
__________________
www.IDNtraders.com - register now to win an IDN! It's free to enter!

Last edited by domain_trader; 9th February 2008 at 07:12 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 9th February 2008, 07:20 AM
jacksonm's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,843
iTrader: (26)
Rep Power: 984
jacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to jacksonm Send a message via Skype™ to jacksonm
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by domain_trader
Again, I'm not putting a dampener on things, just saying that this particular document does not resolve the issue that everyone is waiting to hear, and actually may raise a few stumbling blocks. If you disagree with that, then I'm happy to have a civil debate that refers to the actual document in question

But everyone is welcome to their own interpretation and opinion, even us non-'pros'.

You're doing fine, man. I raise the same questions myself. But since Drewbert has given his opinion yesterday, I tend to believe that one. The others, I take with a grain of salt.

Pro, newbie, pancake eater, whatever. A person raising rational discussion has just as much voice right as anyone else in a public forum. Sometimes you need to remind them about this.

.
__________________
.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 9th February 2008, 07:34 AM
domain_trader's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 144
iTrader: (0)
Rep Power: 457
domain_trader is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: GNSO Comments in Response to the ccNSO-GAC Issues Report on IDN Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacksonm
You're doing fine, man. I raise the same questions myself. But since Drewbert has given his opinion yesterday, I tend to believe that one. The others, I take with a grain of salt.

Pro, newbie, pancake eater, whatever. A person raising rational discussion has just as much voice right as anyone else in a public forum. Sometimes you need to remind them about this.

.
Thanks MJ. A bit of healthy debate keeps everyone honest.
__________________
www.IDNtraders.com - register now to win an IDN! It's free to enter!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 05:59 PM.

Site Sponsors
Your ad here
buy t-shirt
מחיר הזהב

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0
Copyright idnforums.com 2005

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54