[NCSG-PC] [urgent] Re: Review on the draft Recommendations for Managing IDN Variant Top-Level Domains

Wed Sep 19 06:54:45 EEST 2018

That's a real shame. I really hope we can find members that follow on these
issues since they directly affect diversity and we can actually do
something about it!

Farzaneh

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 11:38 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
wrote:

> hi all,
>
> all fair questions and concerns, I don't think we elaborated too much in
> our draft anyway. I didn't submit and so we can drop this as we already
> passed the deadline. While I see that we should respond every time,
> we chose to not do so in previous occurrences.
>
> my personal conclusion for the last related IDN comments is that we need
> more capacity on that area and having more members following closely and
> getting involved on the teams. I know that some are participating with
> their individual capacity in several LGR teams (they are by script) and we
> can build on that.
> I discussed with Farznaeh and thinking we should:
> - reach to ICANN staff for some introductory webinars for our members to
> build more awareness on IDN on the technical side, policy-related matters.
> - identify experts within NCSG membership who can help through webinar
> too.
> an approach that can be applied to other areas.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 à 18:42, Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org> a
> écrit :
>
>> Hi Farzaneh,
>>
>> I was part of the drafters' team and I must confess that I did not put
>> too much effort on the work since I was also concerned with other Public
>> Comments that required an effective attention from me, too.
>>
>> Not only the question asked and the IDN issues as a whole require a high
>> technical knowledge and experience with the subject, but also there was a
>> lot of documents to read and a strong background to have before writing
>> something. I went through all the docs but I could not answer most of the
>> questions with enough confidence within the time slot proposed. If you
>> still can, don’t hesitate, go ahead and edit the draft. However; there is
>> no issue/problem not answering all the questions…. We can write “no answer”
>> or “NIHIL”.
>>
>> As far as not submitting a comment here (in state or not), I must refer
>> to Rafik, the policy Chair whose vision is rather to always
>> comment/acknowledge on/a calls.
>>
>> Regarding the questions and in my opinion, 1 is yes, 2a is yes, 2.b is
>> possible (but needs further discussions within NCSG) 3 is mostly yes but
>> with some nuances to clarify. For 5, I am unable to answer by now (further
>> reading and IDN knowledge to gain). Regarding the 6th, what you are
>> describing seems to be a valid additional risk, and there may be many
>> others to add but with strong rationale (to describe and to simulate their
>> impacts)
>>
>>
>> That’s it!
>>
>> @__f_f__
>>
>> Best Regards
>> ____________________________________
>>
>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 18 Sep 2018, at 05:52, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi All
>>
>> I know we are all overburdened with a lot of work and I thank whoever
>> drafted this document. But I think this comment needs further improvement.
>> We are not really addressing the issues that the report is asking for.
>> I pasted the questions. I am sorry I am of no help, I really don't have
>> the time to read carefully but here are my observations:
>> 1. I think something pertinent to question 3 and 4 (and I might be wrong)
>> is that if they want to again delegate the name of the countries in IDN to
>> the cctld managers, these managers should not be allowed to use UDRP
>> service providers such as WIPO.  (I don't know how far they go, do they
>> delegate  similar names of countries and territories -overreach alert- or
>> exact names? I could not figure out)
>> Why am I against that? Because even in non IDN ccTLDs we see trademark
>> overreach. Amazon has claimed so many domain names that have had
>> similarities to Amazon in ccTLDs that Amazon did not even have any business
>> at!!! Rest assured that this is going to happen to IDNs as well. Note that
>> processes such as WIPO are most of the time only in English.
>> If we are defenders of diversity I think this is where we should act!
>>
>> Anyhow. I might be wrong. As I said it was a cursory review and general
>> knowledge.If we cannot elaborate on the questions below, then I think we
>> should not submit the comment in its current state.
>>
>> Questions that were asked:
>>
>>
>>    1. *The rationale for the RZ-LGR requires strictly adhering to the
>>    IDN variant label sets defined by the community through the RZ-LGR. Is this
>>    a reasonable pre-requisite for implementing IDN Variant TLDs?*
>>    2. *Do the proposed recommendations appropriately address the
>>    management and implementation of the IDN Variant TLDs?*
>>       1. *Do any suggested recommendations need to be changed? Why?*
>>       2. *Are any additional recommendations needed?*
>>    3. *Does the analysis suitably cover the impact of the
>>    recommendations on existing procedures for IDN ccTLDs and IDN gTLDs? Is
>>    there alternate analysis for certain cases? Are there any additional
>>    impacts on the procedures not identified?*
>>    4. *Which (if any) of the recommendations require policy
>>    consideration by GNSO and ccNSO, whereas the remaining would only have an
>>    impact on procedures?*
>>    5. *To prevent the permutation issue which can be introduced by using
>>    variant labels, as identified by SSAC, how may the allocated IDN
>>    Variant TLD labels be limited? Are the mechanisms suggested in Appendix C
>>    appropriate? What other factors may also be relevant?*
>>    6. *Are the risks and their mitigation measures sufficiently
>>    comprehensive? Are there any additional risks? Should there be different or
>>    additional mitigation measures?*
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 8:08 PM Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> hi all,
>>>
>>> the deadline passed but it is possible to submit. please chime in
>>> the draft comment is quite short.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>>
>>> Le lun. 17 sept. 2018 à 22:06, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>>> écrit :
>>>
>>>> hi all,
>>>>
>>>> please review the draft statement, the deadline for submission is today.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Rafik
>>>>
>>>> Le sam. 15 sept. 2018 à 16:44, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a
>>>> écrit :
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> please review the draft comment
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit.
>>>>> the deadline for submission is the 17th September.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rafik
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>>> From: Farell FOLLY <farell at benin2point0.org>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>
>>>>> This is another public comment on the IDN for review. It is a brief
>>>>> comment but all new suggestions are welcome. The deadline is to the 17th of
>>>>> September.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IIt4o1kSwN2o0aJJ09IL1Qh49GVdlps2QLdhmpA0BI/edit
>>>>>
>>>>> @__f_f__
>>>>>
>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>> ____________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> (Ekue) Farell FOLLY
>>>>> NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
>>>>> linkedin.com/in/farellf
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180918/4e692ca4/attachment.htm>