cctld & Dname/NS Record

[555]

Hi All,


1.Where do you see the .com and .net (which is all that is now available for most languages) when they will implement idn.cctld i.e computer.com.ua (ukraine) or computer.be (belgium) - Also, when do you think they will work on these cctld idn's?

2.Any news/updates concerning implementation of dname or ns record?

Thanks!

Michael

[Rubber Duck]

Hi All,


1.Where do you see the .com and .net (which is all that is now available for most languages) when they will implement idn.cctld i.e computer.com.ua (ukraine) or computer.be (belgium) - Also, when do you think they will work on these cctld idn's?

2.Any news/updates concerning implementation of dname or ns record?

Thanks!

Michael

Well as with everything else, they will do it when they get around to it. Japan, Korea and China have done it in a timely manner. Everyone else will be far too late to have much influence. Have .CN and .JP killed dot com? I doubt it!

[555]

Another ICANN Captioning concerning IDN'S:

http://www.icann.org/meetings/marrakech/captioning-idn-ws-26jun06.htm

And i will try again if someone can help understand:

1. IF they go with ns record = our domains will have a "twin brother"?
Example: Existing idn ячсми.com / new ns record idn.idn ячсми.ком?

2. IF they choose to map/use equivalents then what happens to our regged idn domains?

3. is it technically possible for them to go with dname as a "temporary solution" while taking 2-3-4 years to start these ns record names?

4. Is there a time frame anyone knows of that by that time we will know the decision?

Thank you!
Michael

[drbiohealth]

If these two, ячсми.com and ячсми.ком, become two separate entities then I guess there would be total lawlessness because they are so confusingly similar.


Example: Existing idn ячсми.com / new ns record idn.idn ячсми.ком?

[thefabfive]

If these two, ячсми.com and ячсми.ком, become two separate entities then I guess there would be total lawlessness because they are so confusingly similar.
...dogs and cats, living together... mass hysteria!

[alpha]

this is a comforting quote: A WARNING TO THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE BANKING ON IDNS, WE LOOK AT USERS IN MANY PARTS OF THE WORLD, WE ARE DISCOVERING THAT DOMAIN NAMES ARE BEING USED LESS AND LESS AND THAT SEARCH ENGINES AND PORTALS AND CROSS REFERENCES AND DIRECTORIES ARE BEING USED MORE AND MORE.
WERE THAT TREND TO CONTINUE, WE COULD GUESS THAT IN SOME NUMBER OF YEARS, USERS WOULDN'T CARE WHAT WAS IN THEIR DOMAIN NAMES.

edit: WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE PERMITTED CHARACTER LIST.
WE NEED TO CONSIDER REMOVING NON-LANGUAGE CHARACTERS.
WE MAY NOT NEED TO DRAW PICTURES IN A DOMAIN NAME.
MAYBE THAT'S MORE TROUBLE THAN IT'S WORTH.
AND REMOVING WORD SEPARATOR CHARACTERS.
IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN POSSIBLE TO HAVE A DOMAIN NAME LABEL WITH A SPACE IN IT, BUT THERE ARE REALLY GOOD REASONS WHY NOBODY'S DONE IT OR NOBODY DOES IT REGULARLY.

[555]

i dont see the comfort in this statement (where is the statement taken from btw)

in relation to this thread what is your thoughts on:

Assuming that we dont get what we hope for (DNAME) but get ns record...

imo the only advantage we will have would be the direct navigation/seo traffic from the idn's we own... and the question is...if you would have to make an educated guess of how much more traffic we will get i.e 1yr after ie7 is out in comparesment to today's traffic (x10 , x100 ,x45.2 etc...)

[domainguru]

this is a comforting quote: A WARNING TO THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE BANKING ON IDNS, WE LOOK AT USERS IN MANY PARTS OF THE WORLD, WE ARE DISCOVERING THAT DOMAIN NAMES ARE BEING USED LESS AND LESS AND THAT SEARCH ENGINES AND PORTALS AND CROSS REFERENCES AND DIRECTORIES ARE BEING USED MORE AND MORE.
WERE THAT TREND TO CONTINUE, WE COULD GUESS THAT IN SOME NUMBER OF YEARS, USERS WOULDN'T CARE WHAT WAS IN THEIR DOMAIN NAMES.

[/I][/B]

1) Who said this?
2) Where is their evidence that "domain names are being used less and less" - domain registrations are continually on the up.
3) "Users wouldn't care what was in their domain names" sounds like a load of b***** to me. We heard it all 3 years ago when googling was set to replace domain names. Give me a break someone.

[alpha]

....where is the statement taken from btw...

your hyperlink above!!

1) Who said this?
2) Where is their evidence that "domain names are being used less and less" - domain registrations are continually on the up.
3) "Users wouldn't care what was in their domain names" sounds like a load of b***** to me. We heard it all 3 years ago when googling was set to replace domain names. Give me a break someone.

i'm only copy/pasting quotes from icann workshop!!! don't shoot the messenger!!!

[domainguru]

your hyperlink above!!



i'm only copy/pasting quotes from icann workshop!!! don't shoot the messenger!!!

I am just saying he is talking nonsense from the brief quote I have seen. Nothing against the messenger whatsoever!

And for the person that said these things, perhaps he is getting cause and effect mixed up i.e. most people in the world don't use domains because they are in a foreign language, not most people don't want to use domains. (But still, where is the evidence about people not using domains so much ...)

[Rubber Duck]

Another ICANN Captioning concerning IDN'S:

http://www.icann.org/meetings/marrakech/captioning-idn-ws-26jun06.htm

And i will try again if someone can help understand:

1. IF they go with ns record = our domains will have a "twin brother"?
Example: Existing idn ячсми.com / new ns record idn.idn ячсми.ком?

2. IF they choose to map/use equivalents then what happens to our regged idn domains?

3. is it technically possible for them to go with dname as a "temporary solution" while taking 2-3-4 years to start these ns record names?

4. Is there a time frame anyone knows of that by that time we will know the decision?

Thank you!
Michael

In reality it would not have one but hundreds of twin brothers. I know that for this particular term only the Cyrillic is relevant, but for all the other terms the goodness knows how many equivalents would all need to be installed into the Root and they would all need regulatory approval. This undoubtedly could not occur at the same time, as agreement for some would take much longer than for others, especially for language where the Unicode has not even yet been determined. They would all have to linked and equated at some point. Nightmare scenario. DNAME is the only viable solution for general roll out. NS Record will pacify the Chinese temporarily if the DName thing doesn't pass its initial test flight, but at best it is patch and make do.

[alpha]

For once there seems to be some juicy stuff in the write up.

If anyone who understands it fancies summarising the key points from OUR perspective it will be greatly appreciated by many here.

[Rubber Duck]

1) Who said this?
2) Where is their evidence that "domain names are being used less and less" - domain registrations are continually on the up.
3) "Users wouldn't care what was in their domain names" sounds like a load of b***** to me. We heard it all 3 years ago when googling was set to replace domain names. Give me a break someone.

This is largely rhetoric to convince the wafes and strays that they need to go with DNAME. What he is trying to say is that if the IDN solution is not forthcoming the World won't wait forever. Either ICANN get relevant or something else wil happen.

For once there seems to be some juicy stuff in the write up.

If anyone who understands it fancies summarising the key points from OUR perspective it will be greatly appreciated by many here.

I watched a lot of it on the Webcam Yesterday, as well as some non IDN bits by mistake. What was noticeable was a lot of the non IDN bits talked mostly about IDN. It is an all pervasive phenomenon which is impacting on every aspect of ICANN policy making.

The ICANN workshops themselves seem to be more about selling the idea and outlining the limitation of the concept. It is clear that even with ICANN understanding is very poor. John Klensin went to some length to try to explain that DNAME is not a domestic robot or teasmade. It not your personal organiser or year planner. It will at best only do what it says on the tin and that there maybe unforeseen restriction. I think he would like to see the concept trimmed down so that it does the essential well, but possibly misses out some of the whilstles and bells. He was trying to make it clear to the policy gurus that they can only offer what the technical people can deliver. In other words policy will be dictated by technical limitations and not the other way around.

[Giant]

This is largely rhetoric to convince the wafes and strays that they need to go with DNAME. What he is trying to say is that if the IDN solution is not forthcoming the World won't wait forever. Either ICANN get relevant or something else wil happen.

I know the "Real Name" people like to use this kind of rhetoric. We can call it the stupid quote of the day.

My opinion is, both DNAME and NS RECORD are bad idea, the domains we have now are perfectly fine. The trouble of shifting back and forth should be solved by browser or keyboard design, we should not modify Root Servers to accommodate the comfort of human habit. Because human habit can change over time.

[Rubber Duck]

I know the "Real Name" people like to use this kind of rhetoric. We can call it the stupid quote of the day.

My opinion is, both DNAME and NS RECORD are bad idea, the domains we have now are perfectly fine. The trouble of shifting back and forth should be solved by browser or keyboard design, we should not modify Root Servers to accommodate the comfort of human habit.

The decision to put the first level into the Root was largely taken because it was known that the Browsers would attempt to highjack traffic given half the chance. By putting this into the Root it takes the responsibility away from them and should result in a fundamentally more reliable system in terms of accurate resolution. The other problem is that the implementation of the second level has taken forever because of the wanton neglect of the browser writers. It was clear that they could not be trusted again.

[Olney]

Can I resay this correctly...

A WARNING TO THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE BANKING ON IDNS, WE LOOK AT USERS IN MANY PARTS OF THE WORLD, WE ARE DISCOVERING THAT DOMAIN NAMES ARE BEING USED LESS AND LESS AND THAT SEARCH ENGINES AND PORTALS AND CROSS REFERENCES AND DIRECTORIES ARE BEING USED MORE AND MORE.
WERE THAT TREND TO CONTINUE, WE COULD GUESS THAT IN SOME NUMBER OF YEARS, USERS WOULDN'T CARE WHAT WAS IN THEIR DOMAIN NAMES.

Warning, We have Discovered that since IE the main browser couldn't work with IDN Domains, & the technical issues we never fixed weren't resolved. People in other countries could care less about Domains in ASCII that they can't remember & have been forced gto find every single, web site from Search Engine results. Instead of realizing that IDNs would be a solution to people being able to type in Domains, actually be able to remembers them, & companies being to actually register their "Exact Named" in their native language... Let's pretend that none of that matters, & go back to pretending that everyone loves ASCII Domains...


I saw the Webcast that mofo scares me....

[Rubber Duck]

I would also like to make the point that the DNAME proposal will not technically require putting anything new into the root, unless muppet decides that the world needs hundreds of duplicate registeries.

If we are simply talking about Aliasing existing registries as we should be, and from a practical stand point must be, then all IDN traffic is simply syphoned off, normalised and then fed back into the root in ASCII format. That is why the necessary changes don't require regulatory approval. Anything else will, and for that reason, it will take forever.

[Giant]

I would also like to make the point that the DNAME proposal will not technically require putting anything new into the root,...

Yes, that's why DNAME is what ICANN should choose to go ahead.

But I want to clarify that DNAME is not an essential part of IDN, it just help users feel more comfortable in 2 ways:

1) No more shifting back and forth, they just type 中国。公司, instead of typing 中国 + SHIFT + .com.

2) They feel proud of themselves because even the extensions are in their language.

#2 should be ignored by ICANN because it's just an illusion, not real need. The Arabic number 1, 2, 3... are part of Chinese characters now, there's no reason why we can't accept latin letters a, b, c.. as our own characters.

[Rubber Duck]

Yes, that's why DNAME is what ICANN should choose to go ahead.

But I want to clarify that DNAME is not an essential part of IDN, it just help users feel more comfortable in 2 ways:

1) No more shifting back and forth, they just type 中国。公司, instead of typing 中国 + SHIFT + .com.

2) They feel proud of themselves because even the extensions are in their language.

#2 should be ignored by ICANN because it's just an illusion, not real need. The Arabic number 1, 2, 3... are part of Chinese characters now, there's no reason why we can't accept latin letters a, b, c.. as our own characters.

I don't think that quite encompasses the Arabic, Hebrew, Farsi or Persian perspectives. Without IDN.IDN right to left is a nightmare.

[blastfromthepast]

In Russia, every one knows domain names as either домен.РУ, домен.КОМ, домен.НЕТ. That's how people speak, that's how websites title themselves.

I'm sure there are newbies who are typing in домен.ру and домен.ком into their browser bars right now, and are suprised that they don't resolve.

[Giant]

I don't think that quite encompasses the Arabic, Hebrew, Farsi or Persian perspectives. Without IDN.IDN right to left is a nightmare.

Agree, that's my Asian perspective only.

[IDNCowboy]

this is a comforting quote: A WARNING TO THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE BANKING ON IDNS, WE LOOK AT USERS IN MANY PARTS OF THE WORLD, WE ARE DISCOVERING THAT DOMAIN NAMES ARE BEING USED LESS AND LESS AND THAT SEARCH ENGINES AND PORTALS AND CROSS REFERENCES AND DIRECTORIES ARE BEING USED MORE AND MORE.
WERE THAT TREND TO CONTINUE, WE COULD GUESS THAT IN SOME NUMBER OF YEARS, USERS WOULDN'T CARE WHAT WAS IN THEIR DOMAIN NAMES.

edit: WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE PERMITTED CHARACTER LIST.
WE NEED TO CONSIDER REMOVING NON-LANGUAGE CHARACTERS.
WE MAY NOT NEED TO DRAW PICTURES IN A DOMAIN NAME.
MAYBE THAT'S MORE TROUBLE THAN IT'S WORTH.
AND REMOVING WORD SEPARATOR CHARACTERS.
IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN POSSIBLE TO HAVE A DOMAIN NAME LABEL WITH A SPACE IN IT, BUT THERE ARE REALLY GOOD REASONS WHY NOBODY'S DONE IT OR NOBODY DOES IT REGULARLY.

The person who quoted that is also dumb... People registering IDN's are regging the PRIME TERMS AND KEYWORDS. Whoever puts nice content up and does nice SEO has the potential of seeing their site within the first few pages of google.

[Rubber Duck]

In Russia, every one knows domain names as either домен.РУ, домен.КОМ, домен.НЕТ. That's how people speak, that's how websites title themselves.

I'm sure there are newbies who are typing in домен.ру and домен.ком into their browser bars right now, and are suprised that they don't resolve.

Well exactly, so that means there is huge potential for Traffic Leakage from ASCII to IDN, and I would suggest that it has already started. By the time IDN become the norm, then those with ASCII Generics are going to be on a hiding to nothing.

Of course some of that stray traffic is resolving already but not necessarily where it might have been intended.

It also begs the question, how on Earth does anyone see ASCII surviving if people are expected to say one thing and then change character sets to type something else?

[blastfromthepast]

....

[Rubber Duck]

The person who quoted that is also dumb... People registering IDN's are regging the PRIME TERMS AND KEYWORDS. Whoever puts nice content up and does nice SEO has the potential of seeing their site within the first few pages of google.

Unfortunately, history shows that terms can be applied to the majority of decision takers.

[rhys]

This quote is disturbing because it's ass-backward logic should not be coming from anyone in a leadership or visionary position. It's a mix up of cause and effect which is not subject to debate.

Who is this guy? Does he matter?

[blastfromthepast]

This quote is disturbing because it's ass-backward logic should not be coming from anyone in a leadership or visionary position. It's a mix up of cause and effect which is not subject to debate.

Who is this guy? Does he matter?

He's jealous that some people are "banking on IDNs". In fact, for some reason, the people in charge of domain names have a real negative opinion of domain naming themselves. It's like they really don't like the fact that domains have turned into a big industry at all.

[555]

I Believe it is a she,

Tina Dam

Tina Dam is ICANN's Chief gTLD Registry Liaison. ICANN's gTLD Registry Liaison Department is responsible for issues concerning compliance with the requirements of agreements between ICANN and registry sponsors and operators, as well as building and maintaining relationships with those entities.

Tina has executive-- level experience at the ICANN-accredited registrar Ascio Technologies (formerly known as SpeedNames). At Ascio, Tina's principal responsibility was handling registry relations. Tina also oversaw Ascio's launches of the .biz, .info, and .name top-level domains, and managed the development of all internal and external products and product marketing materials.

Prior to Ascio, Tina was the Systems Architecture Engineer at Navision Software a/s, establishing the architecture design of the company's next generation of products. Navision was acquired by MicroSoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) in 2002.

Tina holds a Master of Science in Mathematics and Physics from the Aalborg University in Denmark and a BBA in Marketing Management and International Trade from Copenhagen Business School.

[blastfromthepast]

Tina Dam

Email: dam@icann.org
Phone: +1/310/301-5838

[blastfromthepast]

Tina Dam

Email: dam@icann.org
Phone: +1/310/301-5838

I just called her and got her voice mail. You guys should let her know.

She also had the gall to participate in the ICANN on IDN at the 2005 domainroundtable.

Pretty pathetic that the spokesperson for IDNs for ICANN said what she said.

[Giant]

No wonder Drewbert has such negative view of ICANN.

[blastfromthepast]

Her cell phone is here:

http://www.imc.org/idn/mail-archive/msg08084.html

[thegenius1]

Her cell phone is here:

http://www.imc.org/idn/mail-archive/msg08084.html


Anbody Call Yet ? Whos going to make the Call ?

[Explorer]

Her cell phone is here:

http://www.imc.org/idn/mail-archive/msg08084.html


As much as we need to put our message through, I would not be an advocate of calling someone's cell phone. I think a well written email should give a lot more credibility. Just my opinion.

[Olney]

It wasn't a woman that said the stuff I quoted.
It was a guy.. I watched the webcast.

[Giant]

It wasn't a woman that said the stuff I quoted.
It was a guy.. I watched the webcast.

Actually this is from one of the IDN architects!

[sarcle]

Lol... The world is coming to an end. Oh, no. Come on Icann isn't going to get rid of domain names what use would they be and how many billions would be lost?

Let's snap back to reality. The dingbats getting dropped has already been known about and discussed.

Calm down, step out side, and get some fresh air.

[555]

From: http://www.icann.org/meetings/marrakech/captioning-pf1-28jun06.htm

The Status Report I Have For You Today Will Contain The Following Elements.

I'll Talk A Little Bit About The Idn Program Plan, An Overview Of Activities
Related To Policy Issues, And An Overview Of The Proposal For Revising A Test
Plan.

And Since These Things Have Evolved So Fast This Week, There Is New Items In
Relation To The Technical Area That Will Be Discussed Later Today.

And Depending On The Result, You Know, I Hope We Can Come Back With A -- An
Updated Status For The Board And The Community As Soon As Possible.

Last On The Agenda Is To Talk A Little Bit About The Idn Guidelines And The
Revision Of That And How That's Progressing.

Within Staff, We've Worked -- And, Of Course, With A Lot Of Input From Dns
And Political And Policy-oriented Experts -- To Develop A Full Program Plan
For All Of The Specific Projects And Actions That Are Necessary To Reach The
Goal Of Deploying Idns.

We Have Several Projects, Technical Test -- I'll Get Into That In A Little
Bit -- Policy Development And Idn Guidelines I'll Also Talk About, And The
Last Three Are Related To Iana Processes, Outreach Planning, And
Communication Plans.

Now, All Of These Are Planned A Little Bit Independently, But They Are All
Correlated.

I Would Like To, In Particular, Point Out Outreach And Communication
Planning.

It's Something That The Community Have Asked For For Quite Some Time, That
We're Better At Reaching Out And Communicating And Explaining What We're
Doing So That The Correct, Or The Appropriate Experts From The Communities
Can Provide Their Input And Their Expertise At The Time That It's Necessary.

Now, With The New Staff, Particularly Paul Levins And The Regional Liaisons,
That Is Something That's Progressing Really Well.

And We're Making Sure That The Planning Of Those Two Projects Are Going To
Speed Up Really Quickly Here With The New Staff And So We Can Get That
Kick-started.

Now, On The Policy Development Activities, And This Is Primarily Since The
Meeting In New Zealand, The Preliminary Issues Report Was Developed And
Published, As Was Requested By The Gnso.

That Report Proposes A Joint Task Force, A Working Group Between The Gnso,
Ccnso, Also With Input From The Gac.

On The 18th Of May, The Gnso Council Had A Conference Call Where They
Resolved To Establish This Working Group And Selected Members -- And Selected
Members To The Joint Task Force.

In June, There Have Been Initial Comments And Priorities On The Preliminary
Issues Report.

The Working Group Have Been Meeting Here And Have Also Participated Somewhat
In The Idn Workshop On Sunday That Took Place To Review Policy Issues And
Discuss Opportunities For Country Code Strings And Assignment Of Those.

I'm Sure Bruce Is Going To Talk A Little Bit More About That When You Get To
His Report.

On The Technical And Operational Test Activities, As You May Recall, We
Released A Proposed Plan Right Before The New Zealand Meeting In March.

During April, We Had Some Initial Discussions With The Rssac, And A Lot Of
Community And Constituency Discussions Around This Test Plan During The
Wellington Meeting.

some Of The Feedback We Got Was In Limitations Of How Dnames Can, As A
Resource Record, Can Be Tested Around This Topic Right Now.
The Other Half Of The Proposed Plan Was Around Ns Records, Which Seems To Be
A Little Bit More Mature To Actually Go Ahead And Make Some Testing Plans On.
So We Discussed Within Icann Staff All Of The Input We Received.

We Sought Some More Consultation By Additional Experts And Started Revising
The Proposed Plan.

We Finalized A Proposal Of That Here In June And Have Talked A Little Bit
About It During The Meetings Here In Morocco.

And Also Have A Process For Finalizing It.

And I'll Get Into A Little Bit Of The Details About That.

but It's Certainly Something That Needs To Go Through A Finalization Process
For Approval Before It Is Considered Final.
Now, The Overall Goal With The Technical And Operational Test Plan Is To
Demonstrate That Insertion Of Idn Strings In The Root Has No Negative Impact
On The Existing Resolutions.
And That Is Something That Can Be Really Difficult To Prove A Negative On.

But We Can Take Some Steps That Allow Us To Say That We're Reasonably Certain
That There Are No Issues, and It's That Goal That We Want To Get To.

In Order To Do That, We Need To Perform A Lot Of Activities.

As I Mentioned, Ns Records In This New Proposed Plan Appears To Be Something
We Can Just Go Ahead And Test.

ns Record Is Nothing Different Than How Tlds Are Inserted In The Root At This
Point In Time With Ascii Tlds.

With Idn Tlds, It Will Be Based On Punycode Strings.
So There Will Be Some Laboratory Tests, Operational Process Tests, To Make
Sure That The Icann And Iana And D.o.c. Processes Are Functioning.

And Eventually End Up With A Root Name Server Test.

Dname Resource Records Needs To Be Analyzed In Much More Detail Due To Some
Of The Feedback That We Got On The Difficulties With That Record At This
Point In Time, Just To Make Sure That We Understand The Full Potential Or Any
Potential Implications Of That Method.

The Two -- All Of These Milestones Within This Project Are -- Some Of Them
Are Going To Be Running In Parallel.

For Example, We're Going To Kick-start The Laboratory Test Development At The
Same Time As We're Continuing The Dname Analysis.

So That's A Little Bit About The Test Plan.

We Will Talk About It At The President's Advisory Committee Meeting Later
Today.

There's Going To Be An Ietf Meeting In Montreal From The 9th To The 14th Of
July Where We'll Have Conversations With The Rssac Again And Other Parties Of
The Ietf.

And Then There'll Be Some Finalization Of The Proposal And Posting It For A
Public Review.

Idn Guidelines.

As You May Recall, Last Year, In November, The 8th Of November, 2005, The
Board Approved A Revision From Version 1.0 To Version 2.0 Of The Idn
Guidelines.

The Board Also Asked The Tld Registries Working Group To Come Back With Some
Additional Revisions.

And The Board Supported An Approach Towards The Bcp, Best Current Practice,
Document For The Guidelines Instead Of Its Current State.

What That Essentially Means Is That As Of Right Now, It's The Gtld Registry
Operators That Are Required To Follow The Guidelines.

And The Framework That Has Been Developed Does Not Necessarily Function
Really Well For The Ccs.

So The Intention With The Best Current Practice Is To Reach Much Broader Than
The Icann Current Contracts Are Able To Do.

We Are Currently -- In Response To The Board's Request On 8 Of November,
We're Currently At Version 2.1 Of The Idn Guidelines.

We Had Anticipated A Draft Best Current Practice By The Time Here In Morocco.

But The Volunteers In That Working Group Are The Same People Who've Been
Working On Introduction Of Idn Tlds, Both On The Policy Side And On The
Technical Side.

And Because Of That And Because That Has Had A Higher Priority, It Has Not
Been Possible To Have A Bcp Draft Ready At This Point In Time.

We Will Continue This Work, And It Is Going To Be Run In Parallel With Other
Idn Tld Activities.

But As Kurt Mentioned Out, We Now Also Have A Budget And Plan For Additional
Staff.

So It Should Be Possible To Move This Forward In A Much Faster Page.

In Relation To The Idn Guidelines And How To Reach The Bcp State, Staff Has
Realized That We Will Need To Develop A Specific Project Plan For That With
Identified Milestones And Timelines Around It.

It's Probably One Of These Areas That In Order To Reach Outside The Gtld
Area, We Haven't Communicated Enough.

And That's Something That We Need To Take Up In Relation With Development Of
This Plan.

And That Concludes My Status Report For Today.

And I Just Want To Say Thank You To Everybody Who Has Been Working So
Actively And Constructive And Jointly To Reach This Goal, To Reach The Goal
For Safe Deployment Of International Top-level Labels.

As I Say To Begin With, I'm Extremely Impressed With All The Work That's
Going On This Week, And I Can See How We're Working Towards Solutions As
Opposed To Continuing To Discuss Difficulties.

>>vint Cerf: Thank You Very Much, Tina.

[blastfromthepast]

Dname Resource Records Needs To Be Analyzed In Much More Detail Due To Some
Of The Feedback That We Got On The Difficulties With That Record At This
Point In Time, Just To Make Sure That We Understand The Full Potential Or Any
Potential Implications Of That Method.

Meanwhile, IE7 is going to roll, and ICANN will still be in the debating and meeting and understanding and collecting salary and wasting time stage.

[555]

Blast, and anyone else, if you would need to put a time on it..what would you say? 6mos,1yr,2yr?

[blastfromthepast]

Blast, and anyone else, if you would need to put a time on it..what would you say? 6mos,1yr,2yr?

Executive Summary

PROPOSAL FINALIZED: "We finalized a proposal of [IDN.IDN] here in June."

• Proposal says: both dname and ns records.

IMPLEMENTATION: "And [we] also have a process for finalizing it. "

• Implementing ns records is easy. --> WILL BE TESTED ASAP

• dname needs work (ie. translating .com into different language) --> READY FOR TRANSLATORS

Timeframe: by the end of the year.

[domainguru]

It wasn't a woman that said the stuff I quoted.
It was a guy.. I watched the webcast.

Judging from the transcript, looks like:

http://www.icann.org/biog/klensin.htm

Very distinguished but nothing on his CV says he has been to Asia :p

[blastfromthepast]

Judging from the transcript, looks like:

http://www.icann.org/biog/klensin.htm

Very distinguished but nothing on his CV says he has been to Asia :p

Contact info:

Klensin, John C.
http://www.networksorcery.com/enp/authors/KlensinJohnC.htm

Klensin, John
CAMBRIDGE, MA 02140
+1 617-864-3247

[Giant]

Judging from the transcript, looks like:

http://www.icann.org/biog/klensin.htm

Very distinguished but nothing on his CV says he has been to Asia :p

ICANN has too few techs for IDN. The implementations of IDN in many parts of the world are very successful, but ICANN still has no idea how these countries solved some of the "difficulties".

[Drewbert]

I got nausea reading that report. Did someone really post it online with the first letter of every word capitalised? I had to stop reading in the end. Made me pine for a batch of !'s at the end instead.

ns might be easier to test, but then it gets VERY political deciding who gets to run the new gTLD's they decide to insert.

DNAME harder to test (but not sure why, technically) but then once each language decides what they want .com and .net translated to, it's simply loaded into the root, and it all works immediately ( and our russian IDN traffic explodes).

[IDNCowboy]

They should have more board people from foreign nations rather than depending on some American in MA.