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

Go Back   IDN Forums - Internationalized Domain Names > IDN Discussions > New gTLDs

New gTLDs IDN or ascii, use this forum to discuss the new gTLDs

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 13th October 2012, 04:52 PM
squirrel's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,940
iTrader: (11)
Rep Power: 7077
squirrel is a name known to all
squirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to all
ICANN 45 Schedule

The full schedule : http://toronto45.icann.org/full-schedule

some IDN related sessions (Eastern Time Zone)

Monday, 15 October 2012 - 16:00 - 17:00
Joint ccNSO / GNSO IDN Working Group (JIG)
Agenda
-Single Character IDN TLDs
-IDN TLD Variants
-Universal Acceptance of IDN TLDs


Wednesday, 17 October 2012 - 16:30 - 18:00
At-Large IDN Working Group
Agenda
-Welcome and Introduction
-Relevant JIG, VIP and New gTLD Updates Related to IDNs
-General At-Large position statement
-Long-term IDN Strategy for ICANN
-Next Steps



Thu, 18 October 2012 - 09:15 - 10:15
IDN Variant TLD Program Update
Agenda
-Brief update on the IDN Variant TLD Program (5 minutes)
-Project Progress Report: The Label Generation Rules Tool (5 minutes)
-Project Progress Report: The Label Generation Rules Process for the Root Zone (15 minutes)
-Project Progress Report: Examining the User Experience Implications of Active -Variant TLDs Project (15 minutes)
-Discussion and Q&A (20 minutes)


If you want to participate and submit ideas, voice your opinion (incl. with respect to the issue RD raised here), I recommend you log in for the first 2 sessions.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 14th October 2012, 04:49 AM
squirrel's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,940
iTrader: (11)
Rep Power: 7077
squirrel is a name known to all
squirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to all
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

For those wondering if the definition of the term "variant" as used by the IDN Variant TLD Program working group includes the case of VRSN's .com vs .كوم and .コム etc..

yes it does

however, it doesn't seem like the IDN variant processes being developed will ultimately apply to such variants.

See section "3.5 Whole-String Issues" of the Integrated Issues Report http://www.icann.org/en/topics/idn/i...20feb12-en.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 14th October 2012, 06:45 AM
domainguru's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,835
iTrader: (14)
Rep Power: 2511
domainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura about
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by squirrel View Post
For those wondering if the definition of the term "variant" as used by the IDN Variant TLD Program working group includes the case of VRSN's .com vs .كوم and .コム etc..

yes it does

however, it doesn't seem like the IDN variant processes being developed will ultimately apply to such variants.

See section "3.5 Whole-String Issues" of the Integrated Issues Report http://www.icann.org/en/topics/idn/i...20feb12-en.pdf
Its a great doc if very very long. I've just skimmed over it, and 7.5 is the most interesting to me:

-----------------
7.5 Examining the technical feasibility of mirroring
Section 5 identified a number of potential treatments (states) of particular variant labels. One potential treatment is the use of "mirroring," whereby two or more labels use some technology (currently a choice between CNAME and DNAME DNS aliasing records) to ensure they provide the same result in the Domain Name System.

Another alternative to using specialized DNS records is to use “parallel provisioning,” whereby regular delegations are made using NS records, and the manager of the zone is obligated via contractual or other means to ensure the contents of those zones are synchronized.

Due to the distributed nature of the DNS, using these approaches is a complex challenge, as it seems difficult to ensure consistency (both vertically and horizontally) throughout the DNS tree. Even if the DNS issues could be solved, application protocols that use the DNS (e.g., the Web, e- mail) would not know of this special relation between the names, making them fail to deliver the expected result. Additionally, it appears challenging to ensure appropriate software support for products which rely on the DNS but do not have proper understanding of the many-to-one domain name relationship that mirroring creates. Finally, it seems mirroring requires a number of actors (some of which are not in direct relation with the registrant/registrar/registry) to act appropriately and with knowledge of the variant relation of the names to obtain the expected result.

If required, a project could be undertaken to study the feasibility of mirroring, in cooperation with technical bodies as necessary. The goal of such a study would be to assess whether it is technically feasible to implement mirroring mechanisms in the root zone, and the conditions required and implications to be considered if mirroring is feasible.
---------------

And in other places, it just mentions that DNS mirroring is not a simple thing, untested and unlikely to provide a consistent user experience etc.

In other words, mirroring in the root zone is not on the table at the moment AFAICS.

If not mirroring, then what policy / implementation choices are left for VeriSign for "IDN .com aliasing"?
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 14th October 2012, 03:59 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Golden West
Posts: 921
iTrader: (0)
Rep Power: 3237
Avtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the rough
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by domainguru View Post
If not mirroring, then what policy / implementation choices are left for VeriSign for "IDN .com aliasing"?
Would they use something along the lines of "parallel provisioning"? In other words, would they require the registrar to ensure that the variants are all owned by the same registrant? Would they go further, and require that all variants use the same DNS settings?

What has been implemented for .中国/.中國 (.china in simplified/traditional script)? That's the closest analog I can think of.

Avtal
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 14th October 2012, 04:45 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: 4504
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: ICANN 45 Schedule

Yes, parallel provisioning is the best that we can expect at the moment. DNS mirroring is way out in the future, even if it ever happens.

Not such a problem really. All we need if for people to understand what is going to be adopted and making sure that Verisign does not sell our Birth Rights from underneath us, which is likely to happen if some of you do not chirp into the consultations and make it clear that selling different version of dot com to different user is going to cause huge end user confusion and therefore it is encumbent on ICANN to prohibit the sale of IDN equivalents of existing gTLD to other than the existing registrant.

It should also be be made clear that as Verisign is not actually selling intellectual property rights but merely a support service that this should be done at a fee level that is appropriate to the service being provided, rather than being used as an excuse to extort a King's Ransom from the rightful owners of the intellectual property.

Its about time we saw what some of you have in your trousers.
__________________
All offers to sell are void.

Last edited by Rubber Duck; 14th October 2012 at 04:46 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 14th October 2012, 04:57 PM
555 555 is offline
ком.ком コム.コム
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,141
iTrader: (33)
Rep Power: 1675
555 has disabled reputation
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubber Duck View Post
making sure that Verisign does not sell our Birth Rights from underneath us, which is likely to happen
To make sure i understand, are you concerned with A, B, Both or something else?

A = You own Пример.com but someone else will get the opportunity to activate Пример.ком
B = You own a Simplified Chinese IDN and someone else will get the opportunity to activate the Traditional Chinese IDN

The most detailed explanation i can find right now is from Chuck Gomes, I think it shows why they should have very little will to want and change anything and assume they do want to change anything i am not sure how they can with ICANN's goal of preventing confusion?


Dec 2009: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-idng/msg00232.html

>> Chuck,
>>
>> Your example makes very interesting reading. Thanks for take
>> actual live Verisign examples to the list, that's very helpful.
>>
>> So I am right in understanding that no matter how many IDN
>> variants of .COM Verisign launches, the intent is that the
>> holder of an ASCII .COM name, say EXAMPLE.COM, would
>> automatically be listed as the owner of the corresponding
>> EXAMPLE.(IDN_COM)?
>
> Chuck: You are mostly correct. First, of all I think it is best to avoid
> the term 'owner'; registrant is a more accurate term. It is not correct to
> say that the holder of an LDH.com would "automatically be listed as the
> owner (registrant) of the corresponding" LDH.IDN_COM. Let me use
> VeriSign.com as an example. VeriSign, Inc. is the registrant of
> VeriSign.com. VeriSign, Inc. would not automatically become the registrant
> of VeriSign.IDN_COM but VeriSign, Inc. is the only one that will be allowed
> to activate the IDN version; no one else could registrer VeriSign.IDN_COM
> even if VeriSign, Inc. has not activated it. BTW, the same principle would
> work for an IDN second level name; it does not have to iniitate with an LDH
> second level registration.
>
>> And is this automatic correspondence only
>> valid for the direct equivalent of the 2nd level name? In
>> other words, I am right in thinking that having EXAMPLE.COM
>> does not entitle me to (IDN-EXAMPLE).(IDN_COM)?
>
> Chuck: Yes. Otherwise, as I stated in an earlier response to Avri, we would
> be put into a nearly impossible situation of making subjective judgements.

> It is up to the registrant to decide what variations of its name they
> consider equivalent and to register those. Again for example, the fact that
> VeriSign, Inc. is the registrant of VeriSign.com would not mean that only
> VeriSign_IDN.com or VeriSign_IDN.IDN_com would be protected; VeriSign would
> have to register VeriSign_IDN.com or VeriSign_IDN.IDN_com.
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Stéphane
>>
__________________
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

Last edited by 555; 14th October 2012 at 05:00 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 14th October 2012, 09:19 PM
bumblebee man's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,620
iTrader: (16)
Rep Power: 2869
bumblebee man has a spectacular aura aboutbumblebee man has a spectacular aura aboutbumblebee man has a spectacular aura aboutbumblebee man has a spectacular aura aboutbumblebee man has a spectacular aura aboutbumblebee man has a spectacular aura aboutbumblebee man has a spectacular aura aboutbumblebee man has a spectacular aura aboutbumblebee man has a spectacular aura aboutbumblebee man has a spectacular aura aboutbumblebee man has a spectacular aura about
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

The big question is:

Why didn't they mention this in their applications?
__________________
These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others. - Groucho Marx
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 14th October 2012, 09:42 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: 4504
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: ICANN 45 Schedule

It is A that I am concerned about.

As Bumblebee man says there is nothing in their submission.

There is also likely to be nothing in the Generic Contract that ICANN is proposing.

Further down the line Verisign could easily say that Stephanie was talking out of turn.

If half the effort had gone been put into trying to address this very real issue that went into the nonsense over digital archery, things might be a lot clearer now.

IDN was alway going to be near the front of the queue. Verisign have played a blinder. But should we trust them them or should we demand they they enter into a binding contract that enshrines the rights of existing registrants.

Do you really rely on ICANN to sort this out without some pressure being exerted?


Quote:
Originally Posted by 555 View Post
To make sure i understand, are you concerned with A, B, Both or something else?

A = You own Пример.com but someone else will get the opportunity to activate Пример.ком
B = You own a Simplified Chinese IDN and someone else will get the opportunity to activate the Traditional Chinese IDN

The most detailed explanation i can find right now is from Chuck Gomes, I think it shows why they should have very little will to want and change anything and assume they do want to change anything i am not sure how they can with ICANN's goal of preventing confusion?


Dec 2009: http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-idng/msg00232.html

>> Chuck,
>>
>> Your example makes very interesting reading. Thanks for take
>> actual live Verisign examples to the list, that's very helpful.
>>
>> So I am right in understanding that no matter how many IDN
>> variants of .COM Verisign launches, the intent is that the
>> holder of an ASCII .COM name, say EXAMPLE.COM, would
>> automatically be listed as the owner of the corresponding
>> EXAMPLE.(IDN_COM)?
>
> Chuck: You are mostly correct. First, of all I think it is best to avoid
> the term 'owner'; registrant is a more accurate term. It is not correct to
> say that the holder of an LDH.com would "automatically be listed as the
> owner (registrant) of the corresponding" LDH.IDN_COM. Let me use
> VeriSign.com as an example. VeriSign, Inc. is the registrant of
> VeriSign.com. VeriSign, Inc. would not automatically become the registrant
> of VeriSign.IDN_COM but VeriSign, Inc. is the only one that will be allowed
> to activate the IDN version; no one else could registrer VeriSign.IDN_COM
> even if VeriSign, Inc. has not activated it. BTW, the same principle would
> work for an IDN second level name; it does not have to iniitate with an LDH
> second level registration.
>
>> And is this automatic correspondence only
>> valid for the direct equivalent of the 2nd level name? In
>> other words, I am right in thinking that having EXAMPLE.COM
>> does not entitle me to (IDN-EXAMPLE).(IDN_COM)?
>
> Chuck: Yes. Otherwise, as I stated in an earlier response to Avri, we would
> be put into a nearly impossible situation of making subjective judgements.

> It is up to the registrant to decide what variations of its name they
> consider equivalent and to register those. Again for example, the fact that
> VeriSign, Inc. is the registrant of VeriSign.com would not mean that only
> VeriSign_IDN.com or VeriSign_IDN.IDN_com would be protected; VeriSign would
> have to register VeriSign_IDN.com or VeriSign_IDN.IDN_com.
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Stéphane
>>
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 14th October 2012, 10:02 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Golden West
Posts: 921
iTrader: (0)
Rep Power: 3237
Avtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the roughAvtal is a jewel in the rough
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by bumblebee man View Post
The big question is:

Why didn't they mention this in their applications?
A couple of possibilities:

1) Verisign themselves haven't figured out yet exactly how to reconcile the interests of IDN.com registrants with the requirements of the Trademark Sunrise.

2) (More likely) Verisign didn't want to put anything extraneous in their application that might confuse the ICANN evaluators. ICANN has made it clear that the interests of trademark owners and national governments are paramount; suggesting that IDN.com registrants also have rights would risk delaying the application, since the evaluators look for conformance with the Applicant Guidebook.

I'm still pretty optimistic that most IDN.com registrants (with some exceptions for trademarks and country names) will get IDN.com-in-IDN, just because it isn't in Verisign's interest to create user confusion around their main brand.

Avtal
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 14th October 2012, 10:16 PM
Semi-retired
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,531
iTrader: (57)
Rep Power: 3435
alpha has disabled reputation
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by bumblebee man View Post
The big question is:

Why didn't they mention this in their applications?
Why would they?
The application serves one purpose, to jump cleanly through the hoops icann put up in this process, and to do so means answering all mandatory questions. Why would they then volunteer info on what may be a controversial topic for some people?
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 15th October 2012, 02:40 AM
sbe18's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,334
iTrader: (10)
Rep Power: 1637
sbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enough
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

I think the IDNers who are holders of trademarks in IDN will be facing the udrp/ urs process in 2013.

the lawyers getting $500/ hour will be preferred to a swap at $5000.

s/
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 15th October 2012, 04:26 AM
domainguru's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,835
iTrader: (14)
Rep Power: 2511
domainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura about
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbe18 View Post
I think the IDNers who are holders of trademarks in IDN will be facing the udrp/ urs process in 2013.

the lawyers getting $500/ hour will be preferred to a swap at $5000.

s/
For sure. Not to mention all the borderline cases. Always bear in mind generic vs TM is often not a clear-cut case. We have all seen it. Generics being taken away from registrants, or attempts to do so.

I predict anyone with a big IDN holding will get UDRP'd in 2013, even if they have very careful to avoid TM's.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 15th October 2012, 01:06 PM
555 555 is offline
ком.ком コム.コム
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,141
iTrader: (33)
Rep Power: 1675
555 has disabled reputation
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubber Duck View Post
It is A that I am concerned about.

As Bumblebee man says there is nothing in their submission.

There is also likely to be nothing in the Generic Contract that ICANN is proposing.

Further down the line Verisign could easily say that Stephanie was talking out of turn.

If half the effort had gone been put into trying to address this very real issue that went into the nonsense over digital archery, things might be a lot clearer now.

IDN was alway going to be near the front of the queue. Verisign have played a blinder. But should we trust them them or should we demand they they enter into a binding contract that enshrines the rights of existing registrants.

Do you really rely on ICANN to sort this out without some pressure being exerted?
Most important and regardless of how likely or unlikely this scenario is, What do you see and suggest that registrants/members here can do at this point and time?

- I personally don't yet understand or see a way for PIR or Verisign to do that assume they would like to.
__________________
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
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 15th October 2012, 01:58 PM
mulligan's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,253
iTrader: (78)
Rep Power: 2023
mulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enough
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

Why country names? Does it say somewhere that this is the case?
I checked a few ASCII country names and they are held by individuals or companies, why would IDN.IDN (com/net/etc) be treated any differently or did I miss something?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avtal View Post
I'm still pretty optimistic that most IDN.com registrants (with some exceptions for trademarks and country names) will get IDN.com-in-IDN, just because it isn't in Verisign's interest to create user confusion around their main brand.

Last edited by mulligan; 15th October 2012 at 01:59 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 15th October 2012, 06:17 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: 4504
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: ICANN 45 Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by 555 View Post
Most important and regardless of how likely or unlikely this scenario is, What do you see and suggest that registrants/members here can do at this point and time?

- I personally don't yet understand or see a way for PIR or Verisign to do that assume they would like to.
What everyone can do is to lobby ICANN at every possible opportunity and in large number to demand that our rights are enshrined in the contract between Verisign and ICANN otherwise we just have Stephane's word for it, and frankly, I would not even know where to find her.

ICANN has just launch another consultation process. Post your concerns in there. I think one of the original gTLD consultations is still open. Frankly, tell anyone that will listen that if ICANN is not making Verisign's and PIR's obligations contractual then it is not doing its job. But unfortunately, there is precident for that!
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 15th October 2012, 06:19 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: 4504
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: ICANN 45 Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by mulligan View Post
Why country names? Does it say somewhere that this is the case?
I checked a few ASCII country names and they are held by individuals or companies, why would IDN.IDN (com/net/etc) be treated any differently or did I miss something?
Because IDN.IDN are New GTLDs and IDN.com are not! It is in the rule book at the behest of the GAC.
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 15th October 2012, 07:54 PM
mulligan's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,253
iTrader: (78)
Rep Power: 2023
mulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enough
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

Do you have a link to this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubber Duck View Post
It is in the rule book at the behest of the GAC.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 16th October 2012, 12:51 AM
squirrel's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,940
iTrader: (11)
Rep Power: 7077
squirrel is a name known to all
squirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to all
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by mulligan View Post
Do you have a link to this?
http://www.idnforums.com/forums/2900...tml#post179418
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 16th October 2012, 07:29 AM
mulligan's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,253
iTrader: (78)
Rep Power: 2023
mulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enoughmulligan will become famous soon enough
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 17th October 2012, 09:14 PM
squirrel's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,940
iTrader: (11)
Rep Power: 7077
squirrel is a name known to all
squirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to allsquirrel is a name known to all
Re: ICANN 45 Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by squirrel View Post


Wednesday, 17 October 2012 - 16:30 - 18:00
At-Large IDN Working Group
Agenda
-Welcome and Introduction
-Relevant JIG, VIP and New gTLD Updates Related to IDNs
-General At-Large position statement
-Long-term IDN Strategy for ICANN
-Next Steps
<QUESTION> Does the ICANN Variant TLD Program's definition of variant include linguistic variants ? For example are .Moscow and .Mockba (in Cyrillic) considered variants of one another under the Variant TLD Program ? What about .org and .org in cyrillic ?</QUESTION>

<ANSWER>No</ANSWER>


I'm unsure what the best ICANN channel would be to raise the aliasing concerns with respect to VRSN and PIR's applications. The Variant TLD Working Group clearly isn't.
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 04:14 AM.

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