Presentation by Ram Mohan to GNSO Council and IDN wg meeting Lisbon powerpoint

[DavyBUK]

Presentation by Ram Mohan to GNSO Council and IDN wg meeting Lisbon powerpoint -

(Not sure if this has been posted already so sorry if it has)

http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/gnso-idn-wg-outcomes-ram.pdf

[bwhhisc]

Thanks for posting

[alpha]

i read that as aliasing has been struck off the radar?

[bwhhisc]

i read that as aliasing has been struck off the radar?

Yea, I read the same which seemed confusing. Are we talking idn to idn here, or is this meaning that they are sorting out ascii and idn?

Is the below quote referencing "existing domains name holders" as in ASCII?

QUOTE "Agreement to avoid ASCII Squatting situation where new "non-IDN" gTLD strings, if accepted for insertion into the root earlier than an IDN gTLD could pre-empt later applications for IDN gTLD"

Then these were also in the report:
QUOTE "Aliasing provdes protection of and reduce confusion for existing domain name holders, while recognizing there also may be disadvantages.

Then this, which seems contrary to the paragraph that came before it.
QUOTE "Aliasing does not eliminate confusion and should be struck from a list of potential solutions"

[touchring]

So, are we gona have .mobi, .museum, .info., .biz, in Hindi??

idn.anything?

Acro once said, the best domain ever - idn.mobi. :p

[alpha]

Yea, I read the same which seemed confusing. Are we talking idn to idn here, or is this meaning that they are sorting out ascii and idn?

Is the below quote referencing "existing domains name holders" as in ASCII?

QUOTE "Agreement to avoid ASCII Squatting situation where new "non-IDN" gTLD strings, if accepted for insertion into the root earlier than an IDN gTLD could pre-empt later applications for IDN gTLD"

Then these were also in the report:
QUOTE "Aliasing provdes protection of and reduce confusion for existing domain name holders, while recognizing there also may be disadvantages.

Then this, which seems contrary to the paragraph that came before it.
QUOTE "Aliasing does not eliminate confusion and should be struck from a list of potential solutions"

i think what they are saying is that, in the new igtld there will be no automatic rights of an ascii.idn holder to have the idn.idn ...

... this is being done so that scores of people dont go out and try and register the ascii version on the assumption that it gives them rights over the idn.

[bwhhisc]

i think what they are saying is that, in the new igtld there will be no automatic rights of an ascii.idn holder to have the idn.idn

Thats how I interpreted it too.

So now those that missed the .com and .net might be able to choose from a full variety of other IDN extensions.

this is being done so that scores of people dont go out and try and register the ascii version on the assumption that it gives them rights over the idn.

What might even be left to register in ascii that you would even want in idn?

[DavyBUK]

The bit about aliasing is in the "Support for" bit so I think thats showing that there is support in the working group for it but also support for the view that it doesn't help and should be struck off the list...so they are split on the issue and there members of the group on both sides....

[alpha]

..What might even be left to register in ascii that you would even want in idn?

no you misunderstand.

I read this as: the new igtld will allow latin too. So they are saying that registering the english.idn will not give you automatic rights to the idn.idn

they are saying that this should be the rule, just in case igtld is launched in a phased approach. i.e english.idn first, then native.

[bwhhisc]

no you misunderstand.

I read this as: the new igtld will allow latin too. So they are saying that registering the english.idn will not give you automatic rights to the idn.idn

they are saying that this should be the rule, just in case igtld is launched in a phased approach. i.e english.idn first, then native.

Thanks for pointing that out. I was still back on "ascii'ers" trying to suggest that they should get their 'equivalents' in idn scripts.

I guess it was only natural that if they do allow .idn (unicode) extensions that they let the "ascii'ers" have their "words" in the mix as well. Looks to me like ICANN is setting up their biggest cash cow ever. Err...better make that an entire field of cows!

[Rubber Duck]

Just to clarify, Squatting in this context refers to Registry squatting rather than Registrant Squatting. We are talking about top level not second level.

Yea, I read the same which seemed confusing. Are we talking idn to idn here, or is this meaning that they are sorting out ascii and idn?

Is the below quote referencing "existing domains name holders" as in ASCII?

QUOTE "Agreement to avoid ASCII Squatting situation where new "non-IDN" gTLD strings, if accepted for insertion into the root earlier than an IDN gTLD could pre-empt later applications for IDN gTLD"

Then these were also in the report:
QUOTE "Aliasing provdes protection of and reduce confusion for existing domain name holders, while recognizing there also may be disadvantages.

Then this, which seems contrary to the paragraph that came before it.
QUOTE "Aliasing does not eliminate confusion and should be struck from a list of potential solutions"

So, are we gona have .mobi, .museum, .info., .biz, in Hindi??

idn.anything?

Acro once said, the best domain ever - idn.mobi. :p

We seem to be looking at all extension being Aliased into all languages including ccTLDs.

ccTLD were previously clearly understood by just about everyone as implementatioin of a predetermined list. It is clear that nobody has such a list and there is no obvious way of constructing the list in the short-term. Also it is now recognised that each ccTLD needs to be mapped into each language. Dot CO Dot UK needs to map to Urdu, Hind and Chinese, just for starters!

This has completely blown out of the water any preconceptions that ccTLD would go first on NS followed by gTLD with DNAMES.

It now seems everything requires DNAMES but it is going to take more time to implement that than ICANN are going to get at a political level.

The implication is that ICANN are inescapably going to have to start doing it on an AD-HOC basis in NS for probably both ccTLD and gTLDs, although it is going to take a while for the dust settle. There is no good logical reason to prioritise ccTLD over gTLD. It is also clear that there is a bit of flexibility there to introduce extension on an "Experimental Basis".

no you misunderstand.

I read this as: the new igtld will allow latin too. So they are saying that registering the english.idn will not give you automatic rights to the idn.idn

they are saying that this should be the rule, just in case igtld is launched in a phased approach. i.e english.idn first, then native.

From yesterdays meeting it is clear that ccTLD ---> iccTLD so the new terminology is going to be short lived. Essentially all extension are going to have to be represented in all recognised languages. This makes the adoption of DNAME somewhat inevitable, but not in the immediate future.

[bwhhisc]

This has completely blown out of the water any preconceptions that ccTLD would go first on NS followed by gTLD with DNAMES.
It now seems everything requires DNAMES but it is going to take more time to implement that than ICANN are going to get at a political level. Essentially all extension are going to have to be represented in all recognised languages.

This makes the adoption of DNAME somewhat inevitable, but not in the immediate future.

I have been travelling, so only reading exerps of what has been posted...wasn't the thought
yesterday that DNAME had been "kicked into the grass" or something to that effect?

Was there some kind of change of heart in this regards to DNAMEat the GNSO meeting?

[Prodigy]

So Rd...

Would you care to do a rank of extensions in terms of present, near future and long term values for us? I'm sure alot of us would appreciate it.

[domainguru]

So Rd...

Would you care to do a rank of extensions in terms of present, near future and long term values for us? I'm sure alot of us would appreciate it.

Guys, stop acting like lazy bleating sheep. Why do you expect RD to give you all the answers? I've got some news for you. He is RD, not JC. Give him a break, and go and do the research yourself. Then, if things go great, you can pat yourself on the back and if things go bad you won't have a scapegoat.

[Rubber Duck]

So Rd...

Would you care to do a rank of extensions in terms of present, near future and long term values for us? I'm sure alot of us would appreciate it.

Try to stick with home country ccTLDs and Dot Com, with dot Net as a back-up.

Steer clear of anything else unless you have a definite game plan.

Don't wait for REAL IDN, unless you like smoking grass.

Guys, stop acting like lazy bleating sheep. Why do you expect RD to give you all the answers? I've got some news for you. He is RD, not JC. Give him a break, and go and do the research yourself. Then, if things go great, you can pat yourself on the back and if things go bad you won't have a scapegoat.

Thanks you are absolutely correct their, but if individuals are going to do their own research, throw the net wide and have a look at the broader history of how this has all developed, rather than interpreting difficult jargon in a few phrases from a few confused individuals at ICANN. IDN.IDN has to fit into a broader context following procedures and guidelines that have been formulated over a long period of time. Try to analyse what is being said, and be clear about what Class of Domains are being referred to at any point and above all which level is being referred to.

[Giant]

Just to clarify, Squatting in this context refers to Registry squatting rather than Registrant Squatting. We are talking about top level not second level.

Correct!

[bwhhisc]

Then, if things go great, you can pat yourself on the back and if things go bad you won't have a scapegoat.

Anyone that would be that big of a jackass after the fact should speak up now or forever hold their peace.