Description
In late 2019, the APRALO Leadership Team proposed the initiation of an APRALO Policy Platform for 2020. After reviewing input from RALO members to the proposal and in light of the unexpected COVID-19 pandemic, the Leadership Team considers this APRALO Policy Forum to be a modest but useful kickstart to facilitate and coordinate ICANN policy-related discussions at a regional level.
Purpose:
The APRALO Policy Forum aims to:
- Aim 1: Encourage engagement of APRALO members on issues within ICANN's remit
- Aim 2: Facilitate informed, inclusive regional position development on issues within ICANN's remit
- Aim 3: Support APRALO Leadership's participation as a regional partner to the ALAC Policy Platform / the At-Large Consolidated Policy Working Group
- Aim 4: Grow APRALO outreach opportunities within the AP region and with other RALOs and ICANN communities on ICANN policy issues
- Aim 5: Provide suggestions on AP regional issues of interest which may fall within ICANN’s remit
How do we achieve these aims? By:
- Informing the APRALO Community on ICANN policy issues.
- Engaging the APRALO Community in At-Large discussions on ICANN policy issues
- Consulting the APRALO Community to formulate input on ICANN policy issues.
- Building the capacity of the APRALO Community to effectively participate on ICANN policy deliberations
- Participating in inter-RALO discourse on ICANN policy issues
- Creating intra-regional discourse & cooperation opportunities to advocate for individual end user interests
APRALO Priorities for 2023-2024
| Area | 1. Vis-à-vis ALAC/At-Large Community | 2. Policy-related priorities | 3. RALO Membership Retention & Engagement priorities | 4. ICANN operating priorities – top 5 to monitor** | 5. Consideration of additional, new topics *** |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Priorities |
|
|
|
|
|
* Per the 2022 Hot Topic Survey.
** For an explanation of the above priorities in area 4, please refer to: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/op-financial-plan-fy22-26-opplan-fy22-2021-en.pdf
*** Per the APF Town Hall Meetings of 10 Aug 2023
Membership:
Open to all APRALO members interested in ICANN policy-related discussions, by subscription to the mailing list. The membership list is published below.
Operation:
The work of the Policy Forum will be facilitated using a combination of the following resources:
- This work space, as the central repository for the Forum
- The apralo-policy@icann.org mailing list which will be moderated by members of the Leadership Team and supported by At-Large Staff.
- Periodic team/small team project/planning calls
- Event calls
The ICANN Expected Standards of Behaviour will apply.
17 Aug 2023
Discussions & Next Events
APRALO Policy Forum Planning Document: GOOGLEDOC
Next Events:
- In Planning
Immediate Past Events:
- APF Webinar #1 on Next Round of New gTLDs: An Overview, 7 Sep 2023
- APF Town Hall Meeting Session #1, 10 August 2023 at 06:00 UTC
- APF Town Hall Meeting Session #2, 10 August, 2023 at 10:00 UTC
- 20 July, Discussion on Next Round of New gTLDs: Call for Input on Applicant Support Resources
- Ending 26 July, Next Round of New gTLDs: Call for Input on Applicant Support Resources
Projects
COMPLETED [19] APRALO Policy Forum Webinar #1 on the Next Round of New gTLDs: An Overview, 7 September 2023
Background: The first in a planned series of activities around the Next Round of New generic Top-Level Domains, this webinar is designed to provide participants with:
- an overview of:
- the New gTLD Program;
- the policy development work completed by the Subsequent Procedures PDP Working Group (SubPro PDP WG) in 2016-2021;
- the implementation work by the Subsequent Procedures Implementation Review Team (SubPro IRT) leading up to the launch of the Next Round;
- the different roles held by various parts of the ICANN Community in relation to the SubPro PDP and SubPro IRT;
- an understanding of what work remains in terms of policy versus implementation;
- an opportunity to seek clarification and/or raise issues for addressing (to the extent possible); and
- an opportunity to input on agenda building for this Webinar series.
Status: Completed
Event Wiki: APF Webinar, 7 September 2023
Recording: Zoom Recording
COMPLETED [18] APRALO Policy Forum Town Hall Meeting, 10 August 2023
Background: Two sessions of an APRALO Policy Forum Town Hall Meeting designed to provide participants with:
- an update on the APRALO Policy Forum (APF) objectives;
- a recap on the APRALO Priorities for 2023-2024, with an opportunity to reaffirm and/or adjust the priorities;
- a town hall-style open mic time to share thoughts and input and to discuss implementation of APF activities; and
- the ability to help the APRALO Policy Forum formulate its activities for Aug-Dec 2023 to meet its objectives.
Status: Completed
Event Wiki: APF Town Hall Meeting, 10 August 2023
Zoom Recording: Session #1 EN | Session #2 EN
Googledoc for Input: click here
COMPLETED [17] Call for Input on Applicant Support Resources, July 2023
Background: As at the end of ICANN77, the ICANN Board has signaled to the GNSO Council of its intention to not adopt Subsequent Procedures PDP Recommendation 17.2, which deals with the scope of financial resources offered to applicants for applicant support who have been deemed as having qualified for applicant support.
Recommendation 17.2: The Working Group recommends expanding the scope of financial support provided to Applicant Support Program beneficiaries beyond the application fee to also cover costs such as application writing fees and attorney fees related to the application process.
The concern that the ICANN Board has summarily indicated for declining to adopt Recommendation 17.2 is essentially two-fold:
- That the scope of financial support offered is non-exhaustive, per the language of Recommendation 17.2; and
- That it might be against the Board’s fiduciary duty to adopt a recommendation that requires ICANN to make payments to third party service providers, whose work ICANN is essentially evaluating, either directly or indirectly.
What the At-Large can do now is to consider what can we propose to address the ICANN Board’s concerns. By this, we need properly thought-out and articulated proposals which may go towards addressing one or more aspects of the Board’s concerns. A Q&A and discussion session is to be conducted during the APRALO Monthly Call on 20 July 2023 to address this call for input.
Status: Completed
Event Wiki: APRALO Monthly Call, 20 July 2023
Recording: Zoom recording
Googledoc for Input: click here
COMPLETED [16] ICANN77 Policy Forum Readout
Background: The ICANN77 Policy Forum held in Washington D.C. set the stage for the APRALO to organise its first Readout. This Readout featured At-Large, GAC, GNSO and ccNSO panelists from the APAC region, who were invited to discuss their respective key takeaways from ICANN77 with event participants with the aim of identifying where and how end-users may play a role in any next steps to each of those takeaways.
Moderator:
Cheryl Langdon-Orr, At-Large Leader, based in Australia
Panelists:
Amrita Choudhury, APRALO Chair, based in India
Juliana Harsianti, ICANN77 Fellow, based in Indonesia
Antonia Chu, GNSO Councillor, Registrar Stakeholder Group, based in China
Kristina Hakobyan, representing GAC Armenia, based in Armenia
Jordan Carter, ccNSO Vice Chair, based in Australia
Status: Completed
Event Wiki: APRALO Policy Forum ICANN77 Readout
Recording: Zoom recording
Takeaways: Post
ACTIVE APRALO Register of Skills & Interests Project (2021-2023)
Background: Tentatively code-named "Project RoSI", this project is intended to produce a dynamic Register of Skills & Interests for APRALO.
Status: Ongoing. Project RoSI Small Team completed preliminary work on data to be presented to the RALO for consultation vide the Hot Topics Survey 2021/2022. See: Infographic report Infographic report
Dedicated Workspace: Project RoSI Workspace
Contact
Staff Support Lead: Gisella Gruber
Mailing list: apralo-policy@icann.org
To subscribe to the APRALO Policy Forum mailing list (or read the archives / manage your subscription) please send a request to staff@atlarge.icann.org.
Members
Current membership of the APRALO Policy Forum comprises:
| Name | Position | Date Joined / (Resigned) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Justine Chew | Chair | 03.07.2023 | |
| Amrita Choudhury | |||
| Shreedeep Rayamajhi | |||
| Nabeel Yasin | 20.10.2022 | ||
| Gopal Tadipalli | 20.10.2022 | ||
| Dr.N.Sudha Bhuvaneswari | 20.10.2022 | ||
| Asyraf Mierza Abd Rahma | 20.10.2022 | ||
| Md Toufik Hayder | 03.11.2022 | ||
| Kashif Adeel | 04.11.2022 | ||
| Ayesha Iftikhar | 04.11.2022 | ||
| Mohammad Kawsar Uddin | 05.11.2022 | ||
| Md. Jahangir Hossain | 05.11.2022 | ||
| Eranga Samararathna | 05.11.2022 | ||
| Laxmi Prasad Yadav | 09.11.2022 | ||
| Rao Naveed Bin Rais | 10.11.2022 | ||
| Fouad Bajwa | 10.11.2022 | ||
| Shidul Alam Kaisar | 12.11.2022 | ||
| Stacy Gildenston | 14.11.2022 | ||
| Namra Naseer | 16.11.2022 | ||
| Bibek Silwal | 17.11.2022 | ||
| Udeep Baral | 17.11.2022 | ||
| Samik Kharel | 17.11.2022 | ||
| Jaewon Son | 18.11.2022 | ||
| Amir Qayyum | 19.11.2022 | ||
| Abdul Ghayoor Bawary | 20.11.2022 | ||
| Suhaidi Hassan | 20.11.2022 | ||
| Priyatosh Jana | 23.11.2022 | ||
| Abhishek Gautam | 07.07.2023 |
Past Membership
| Justine Chew (Co-Chair) | Satish Babu (Co-Chair) | Maureen Hilyard | Aris Ignacio | Nadira Alaraj |
| Holly Raiche | Gunela Astbrink | Priyatosh Jana | Kristina Hakobyan | Azatullah Dawoodzai |
| Fouad Bajwa | Gopal Tadepalli | Cheryl Langdon-Orr | Mohammad Kawsar Uddin | Sivasubramanian Muthusamy |
| Narine Khachatryan | Amrita Choudhury | Shreedeep Rayamajhi | Jaewon Son | Ali AlMeshal |
| Mahmoud Lattouf | Lianna Galstyan | Amir Qayyum | Winthrop Yu | Hilmi Ghalib |
| Prateek Pathak | Abdul Ghayoor Bawary | K Mohan Raidu | Suhaidi Hassan |
Meetings
- APRALO Policy Forum Call, 08 December 2022
- APF Regional Hot Topics Survey 2022 Report during ICANN75, 20 September 2022
- ICANN75 At-Large Policy: ICANN’s Goal for a Multilingual Internet through IDNs, 19 September 2022
- APRALO Policy Forum Fireside Chat #3: Let's Talk About Transfer Policy, 29 June 2022
- APRALO Policy Forum Fireside Chat #2: Let's Talk About Closed Generics, 08 June 2022
- APRALO Policy Forum Fireside Chat #1: Let's Talk About GNSO PDP 3.0, 26 May 2022
- APRALO Policy Forum Team Call, 13 May 2022
- APF HTS Project Team Call, 13 October 2021
- APRALO Policy Forum: Webinar on IDNs, 27 July 2021
- APF Project RoSI Team Call, 20 July 2021
Archive
APRALO Policy Forum Discussions Archive
21 Comments
Gopal Tadepalli
Universal Acceptance [UA] is a fundamental requirement for a truly multilingual and digitally inclusive Internet. DNS is in the application layer. A huge plus in Distributed Computing is "Location Transparency". UA is subtly anti-theistic to this goal of designing applications that happen anywhere. UA is another way of indicating traceability.
I suggest two parameters for scoring:
A good parameter to have on the score card is "Web Scriptability".
A Case in Point: A headless browser is a web browser without a GUI. They can Perform DDOS attacks on web sites, Increase advertisement impressions and Automate web sites in unintended ways. Google Chrome and Firefox are headless browsers.
People use tags to aid classification, mark ownership, note boundaries, and indicate online identity. IMHO, UA at present is on the lines of "tags" in vernacular languages well adapted to the UNICODE. It is still a "metadata" that can be used in programming.
IMHO, Another parameter to have on the score card is "Incident Responsiveness and Manageability".
An incident may enable quick traceability to a "Local Geography (small footprint)" but its maximum impact may be elsewhere.
Hope this helps.
Gopal T V
Justine Chew
APRALO Policy Forum 2020 Year End Report
This Policy Forum, with its membership standing at more than 15 members, closed out 6 items in its maiden quarter ending December 2020 ( see: APRALO Policy Forum Discussions 2020 Archive ) and will continue to function in 2021 as the RALO's space for facilitating better informed, inclusive regional input on issues within ICANN's remit.
In order to boost the level of output of this Forum, the APRALO Leadership Team will seek feedback on how to ease and improve participation of members via a series of short surveys. Part of our approach will be to establish factors that can contribute to increased participation and/or impediments to members' participation, as well as how to improve members' engagement while also lowering barriers to the same. It would also involves trialing the use of online tools such as Google-form surveys and Google Jamboards.
In 2021, we will also embark on 2 identified projects: (1) Regional Inventory of Skills and Interests; and (2) Regional Hot Topics Survey 2021; one or both of which we anticipate will benefit other symbiotic initiatives planned for the RALO, eg. the APRALO Mentorship Program.
Justine Chew
APRALO Policy Forum Survey #1.2021 Report and Recommendations
Justine Chew
APRALO Policy Forum 2021 Year End Report
We kick-started the year by conducting the APRALO Policy Forum Survey #1.2021 in Mar 2021 to identify key impediments to participating in the APRALO Policy Forum, and to seek ideas for addressing such impediments. The report and recommendations from that survey guided our endeavors for the rest of 2021.
As we approach the end of 2021, I am pleased to note that the APRALO Policy Forum has nearly doubled its membership as compared to this time last year.
We have also carried out a number of initiatives during the year which formed APRALO's contributions towards policy development, community engagement and capacity building. These are:-
1. APRALO Statement on Subsequent Procedures Final Outputs, 1 Jun 2021, wherein APRALO, in endorsing the ALAC's Advice on Subsequent Procedures of 16 April 2021, also emphasized 3 elements of regional importance to us, these being:
2. APRALO Webinar on Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs), 27 Jul 2021, where given the particular importance of IDNs for our region, we took the lead in this capacity building effort in association with the At-Large Capacity Building Working Group (CBWG), to support our RALO members and other interested At-Large members in understanding the history and existing landscape of IDNs in order to engage meaningfully in the work of the GNSO Expedited Policy Development Process (EPDP) on IDNs. We managed to draw 65 participants.
In addition, we have initiated 2 projects, which will now continue into 2022, both of which are designed to further support the region's work in various areas under ICANN's remit. These are:-
3. APRALO Register of Skills & Interests Project (2021) which is designed to produce a dynamic Register of Skills & Interests for APRALO; and
4. Regional Hot Topics Survey 2021 which will be designed primarily to solicit input from RALO members on what topics RALO members believe is of importance to our region and which APRALO should consider embracing in its agenda. Further, we hope to also use the 2021 survey to gauge RALO members input in light of ICANN's FY21-26 operating priorities.
Finally, to prepare for 2022, we are conducting the APRALO Policy Forum Survey #2.2021 to seek feedback on the Policy Forum's role in facilitating better informed, inclusive regional input on issues within ICANN's remit.
APRALO Policy Forum Discussion Archives
Justine Chew
APRALO Policy Forum Survey #2.2021 Report and Guide for 2022 Agenda
Gopal Tadepalli
Justine Chew
Thank you again for the activities of the APRALO Policy Forum.
IMHO, usage of specific terms related to "Internet Technologies" will enhance the effectiveness of the deliberations in ICANN Working Groups. Attached please find my PPT presentation on "Internet Technologies" that provides a quick overview. We can develop this further if there is more interest in this approach.
Whether we like it or not:
The biggest challenge for most companies is that DNS is a complex system that requires an array of software, network infrastructure, hardware and specialized knowledge. For Example: Cloud Computing is a consolidated system.
Once again, I strongly suggest usage of specific terms related to "Internet Technologies" during our deliberations in ICANN.
Gopal Tadepalli
Justine Chew
Goal: Safe and Stable approach to ensure that the "One Internet" is for the End Users.
“Request for Comments” (RFC) turned 50 years on 7 April 2019. They began on 7 April 1969.
From the technical perspective, RFCs have always been a boon for building Internet and making Governance happen with it.
RFCs are the official documents of Internet specifications, communications protocols, procedures, and events. An Internet Standard is documented by a Request for Comments (RFC) or a set of RFCs. Today there are over 8,500 RFCs whose publication is managed through a formal process by the RFC Editor team. Most of the them (not all) are the responsibility of the Inernet Engineering Task Force (IETF)anyone could write an RFC for free.
Anyone could read the RFCs for free. They are open to all to read, without any fee or membership. In a simple language of Iinternet Technlogies, RFCs define how the Internet Works. Interoperability happens due to these RFCs. The elegance of the Internet is that in order to communicate between a mobile phone connected to a broadband provider in the Country A and a server in a data center in Country B, the two networks at either end of the connection do not need a relationship with each other. They have to interoperate.
For the first few years of its existence, the RFC series was essentially a mailing list on paper from the postal service, and it was maintained by hand. Some RFCs are informational in nature. The RFC left questions open and was written in a less formal style. This less formal style is now typical of Internet Draft documents, the precursor step before being approved as an RFC. They are now the official record of the Internet's design decisions, architecture, and technical standards.
A draft standard is not promoted to full standard for at least four months, after operational experience has been obtained, and when there is demonstrated interoperability between two or more independentmechanisms for implementation. Please see the figure below.
In a world that is increasingly intertwined with the Internet, it’s becoming more difficult to maintain the position that the design of Internet protocols doesn’t have a political dimension.
I suggest that APRALO takes the lead in working with the RFC Editor @ https://www.rfc-editor.org/ for hyperlinking the pertinent documents that bind the Policies of Internet Governance to the Mechanism that is a double - edged sword at its core with no central authority & a "Gold Standard" behavior.
Satish Babu As you would appreciate, it is very difficult to single out a specific RFC. However, I am venturing to suggest the following very useful RFC related to IDNs.
Gopal Tadepalli
I have been associated with the progress of Tamil on the Internet since 1999.
Tamil All Character Encoding (TACE16) is a 16-bit Unicode-based character encoding scheme for Tamil language. There are atleast 25 strong differences between TACE16 and Unicode standard for Tamil language: Lot of investments have gone into TACE16.
I was associated with the performance tuning for TACE16 and it performs much better than Unicode Tamil.
TACE16 has been well documented and has renowned scholars in Tamil championing its design and development.
Satish Babu You may be aware of this.
Gopal Tadepalli
For the Records:
According to official sources, Tamil Nadu has over 37,211 government schools and 8,403 government-aided schools which respectively educate 54.71 lakh students (65.79 per cent) and 28.44 lakh (34.20 per cent) students.
I am serving as "Domian Expert" for Computer Science for the Textbook Preparation for Plus I (11th Class) and Plus 2 (12th Class) by the Government of Tamilnadu.
This is my third such effort for the school students from 1998.
In the current edition, we could introduce UNICODE (Tamizh, Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam) to pave for Multilingualism and hopefully Universal Access. It has been an enriching study for me all along.
Gopal Tadepalli
ICANN75 was another great experience for me. Thank you.
"Dynamic Prioritization":
In the domain of Operating Systems, it has a high potential for Starvation. One has to track the age of a given request for a resource waiting in the queue. In a In a generic system it can potentially result in (what I call) "waitlisted to no where" conditions,
Predictable systems enable you to give a confident answer to the quite common question “When will this be done?”.
Workflow management is about predictability. A process workflow happens when the set of tasks is predictable and there are repetitive pattern
The real challenge is automating workflows to enhance "Productivity".
Suggestion: A Fireside Chat on the topic "Dynamic Prioritization and ICANN Remit".
Gopal Tadepalli
It has been very useful to study the Multi-stakeholder model of ICANN from the following scoreable aspects.
#1. openness: attaching more importance to transparency and communication in decision-making;
#2. participation: ensuring participation of all relevant stakeholders
#3. accountability: clarifying the role of each party in the decision-making process; each stakeholder involved should assume responsibility for the role given to them
#4. effectiveness: decisions need to be taken at the appropriate level and time, and deliver what is needed
#5. coherence: ensuring coherence between diverse actions.
In principle, multi-stakeholder model is better 'than governance by governments alone'. A 'stakeholder' has a legitimate interest in a particular Internet governance issue. The model recognizes that not all stakeholders automatically proclaim as stakeholders, and not all multi-stakeholder processes include all stakeholders.
Observation: The ICANN Multi - Stakeholder model has a high potential for resilience even though it has very limited or no wherewithal to control / regulate all stakeholders with / without ICANN.
For future proofing this model, I find the following two aspects very valuable.
Modelling+Internet+Governance 2.jpg
2. Universality - UNESCO's 303 Internet Universality Indicators
https://www.unesco.org/en/communication-information/internet-governance/internet-universality-indicators/roamx-indicators#:~:text=UNESCO's%20Internet%20Universality%20Indicators%20are,Accessibility%2C%20Multi%2Dstakeholder%20participation.
The reality of multi-stakeholder participation is at times challenged by issues that relate both to the nature of the Internet that includes jurisdiction, enforcement, scale and the pace at which it changes and grows.
A discipline of not blaming technology and localization for jurisprudence with local language support are the strong safeguards that I suggest.
Justine Chew
APRALO Policy Forum 2022 Year End Report (up to Oct 2022)
The APRALO Policy Forum has had a very productive year 2022, having delivered 4 key events and the APRALO Regional Hot Topics Survey 2022 project in the last 6 months.
Since its key planning meeting of 13 May 2022, the team had implemented its Fireside Chat Program by running its Inaugural Fireside Chat on GNSO PDP 3.0 on 26 May with Cheryl Langdon-Orr and myself, followed by the (2nd) Fireside Chat on Closed Generics with Holly Raiche and Olivier Crepin-Leblond on 8 June; and the (3rd) Fireside Chat on Transfer Policy with Steinar Grøtterød and Jonathan Zuck on 29 June; all of which were very well-received by participants. Click here to see the aggregated exit poll results.
During ICANN75 in Kuala Lumpur, the team also delivered on 19 September, the At-Large Policy Session: ICANN’s Goal for a Multilingual Internet through Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) featuring ICANN Board Member Edmon Chung, ICANN org’s Sarmad Hussain and (then) ALAC Vice Chair for Policy Jonathan Zuck. In this session, Jonathan shared some preliminary end-user demand perceptions on the availability and usability of IDNs in the Devanagari script from the recent limited end user survey which the At-Large conducted with selected Hindi-speaking communities in India. Click here to view the Zoom recording of this policy session.
And, results of the APRALO Regional Hot Topics Survey 2022 (which the team conducted in Aug-Sep of 2022) were reported during the APRALO F2F meeting at ICANN75. This report, which is intended as input towards the setting of our regional priorities for the next 18-24 months, was also shared at the APRALO Monthly Call of Oct 2022 where the summary was discussed briefly.
Finally, in light of my increasing commitments in respect of GNSO matters, I am stepping down from leading the APRALO Policy Forum, a role which I have had the privilege of holding since 2020. I wish to thank everyone who has supported the goals and projects of this Policy Forum and hope that its activities to-date have not only assisted our RALO members in some way but also showcased contributions APRALO are capable of within the At-Large and ICANN communities.
Kind regards,
Justine Chew
APRALO Policy Forum Discussion Archives
Gopal Tadepalli
Thank you again for the Venn Diagram like mapping for the kind of expertise that ICANN can potential thrive from.
Knowing that you do like reading books, I also wish to mention that the following references may be of use for you.
Bimal Krishna Matilal, Logic, Language and Reality: Indian Philosophies and Contemporary Issues, Motilal Banarsidass, 2017.
Marcos Zampieri and Preslav Nakov (Editors), Similar Languages, Varieties, and Dialects, Cambridge University Press, 2021.
Gopal Tadepalli
Satish Babu Justine Chew
My Opening Keynote Address titled:
Impact of Language on Income and Trade - 7 January 2023 @ 12 Noon IST
during the Indian Institute of Finance International Research Conference & Award Summit between January 6-8 , 2023
Attached please find one slide that is pertinent to ICANN on IDNs.
Gopal_Internet_International_Trade_ICANN.jpg
Submission:
The raw internet connectivity is not adequate. "Internet Network Value" is crucial for International Trade. IDNs is one such value. to address the "Language Barrier". Language is a key factor in the Gravity Model of International Trade I spoke on this keynote address.
Some Pertinent Notes:
#1. A "value network" is a graphical representation of social and technical resources within / between organizations and how they are utilized. The nodes in a value network are abstractions of people. Role is one useful abstraction but this need not be the only one. The nodes are connected by interactions that reflect the outcomes / deliverables.
#2. Metcalfe's law attempts to quantify the value of any network. The value is perceived to be in proportion to square of connected users of a system. This is very debatable.
Internet has always been a technological marvel and economically baffling. There is no single owner but arguably anyone who has access rights to the internet can calim a tiny share as a sort of owner. There is a difference in what one pays for this "ownership" and what one is willing to pay. Presently, it is in surplus..most of the times one may be willing to pay more !!
Gopal Tadepalli
The Challenge of DNS and IP Mappings
In my humble opinion, since DNS is an Application Layer level thinking technology, it goes a long way in building and sustaining resilient systems.
Some Quick Notes:
Mapping a domain name to an IP Address is known as Name-Address Resolution. Even though it all happens reliably and in quick time,, there are a couple of factors that could affect the process:
Not every domain address has unique IP. There may be more than one domain addresses on same IP.
The DNS defines a special domain called in-addr.arpa to translate IPv4 addresses to host names, and the ip6.int and ip6.arpa domains for IPv6 address-to-host name translation.
The DNS function does not provide encryption or hide the IP address. A Virtual Private Network (VPN} does. Also, there is Dynamic DNS and No-IP for the routers.
Free Dynamic DNS Hostnames must be confirmed after 30 days or they will expire, be removed from DNS and put into Redemption. This policy helps keep our network free of unused Hostnames.
I am aware of many tools with effective and efficient user interfaces to make the desirable mappings. However, in my humble opinion, going under the hood helps make effective policies that serve for a long - term. Over this span of time, we may have a percentage of end-users manage the policy within their groups.
I request the stakeholders to give it a serious thought.
Specific to India: Om Vikas, "Language Technology Development in India", Ministry of Information Technology, New Delhi, India.
Notes:
#1:
This is an old report. It is very useful to study. I worked with Dr. Om Vikas and (Late) Maj. Gen. A Balasubrahmanian, AVSM (Retd) on Technology Development in Indian Languages (TDIL).
#2:
I am a Life Fellow of the Indian Social Science Academy (ISSA) that was established on August 15, 1974 with registered headquarters at Allahabad. This is the first and perhaps the only social science related organization that is chartered for Multilingual work.
#3:
Indian Language Data Centre (ILDC) at: https://ildc.in/
Gopal Tadepalli
Today (Thursday, 10 August 2023), APRALO Policy Forum is organizing the "Town Hall" mode of deliberations.
It was in August 2018, I was invited by the Government of Tamil Nadu to serve as a "Domain Expert" for preparing the Computer Science Textbooks for Plus I (11th Class) and Plus II (12th Class) students. There was some work going on with the preparation of the textbooks by then.
On 6 August 2023, I completed five years of this intellectually challenging work.
My task was first to streamline the preparation and publication of the books. The 2018 edition of the books rolled out quite behind the scheduled. Now, the team of experts have ushered in the fourth edition of these textbooks.
There are 38, 209 schools in Tamil Nadu and almost all of them offer Computer Science as a subject. Typically, there are 100 students in each school for a class.
It has been my pleasure participating in the various deliberations pertaining to the IDNs.
I am running to several nice use cases with four languages that punctuate South India.
Satish Babu I am sure you can recount the critical nature of language in India.
Attached please find my choice excerpt from the Plus I (11th Class) Computer Science textbook.
I must thank ICANN for the opportunities provided for me in the space of IDNs.
In my humble opinion, the core challenge is Integrating Literacy, Culture, and Language as IDNs with a technological basis.
One outcome to share:
Although the alphabets for Telugu and Kannada languages could have been encoded under a single Unicode block with language-specific fonts to differentiate the styles, they were encoded separately by the respective governments due to socio-political and to some extent historic reasons only. Suggestion: Dr. Sarmad Hussain may have more insights on evaluating UNICODE Scripts for IDNs under these conditions.
Good References:
Barry Schwartz, "The Paradox of Choice : Why More is Less", Harper Collins eBook, May 2007
Ralph W Fasold and Jeff Cornor-Linton (Editors), "An Introduction to Language and Linguistics", Cambridge University Press, 2006
Victoria Fromkin, Robert Rodman and Nina Hyams, "An Introduction to Language", Cengager Learning, 2007
Gopal Tadepalli
Satish Babu Justine Chew
Anything about indic is seldom about expressions. It is always an experience. Much of the experience tends to remain unexpressed or inexpressible.
What are Indic Scripts for?
I have a very high regard for the script less Aramaic that eventually got a script.
Indic scripts tend to be therefore traceable to an ultimate experience that was best expressed in some form may be at a different age or time. In other words the relationship among the various Indic scripts is not merely a derivative, adaptation or even a variant.
Sanskrit by far gives maximal cover for the Indic Scriptures (scritped using Vedic). Sanskrit has a systemic and well documented word formation methods from the root sounds. Panini has generated 3959 rules to start with from just 14 sounds that is till today the way in which the best of the scripts (please read scriptures) are interpreted and conclusions arrived at. To my mind, it is good to note that these 14 sounds emanated from a musical instrument called "Damaru" in the left hand of the earliest godheads of the Vedic lore. Patanjali, and Katyayana have further shaped the Sanskrit grammar, as is known today.
The method being attempted with LGRs is "algebraic" and is much like the progress of formulating the Sanskrit Grammar without explicit godhead and the subjectivity.
There is a "computational" method as well that goes way beyond the statistical count of the number of occurrences of a "script symbol'. This method should also be considered to regulate the scope, propagation and nullability of a scripted string of characters for repeated use.
The Brahmi script is well studied. The Brahmi script is ancestral to almost all South Asian writing systems. The southern Brahmic group has also heavily influenced the writing systems of Southeast Asia, I have been actively proposing a regulation for South Indian scripts based out of the strongly common Brahmi script.
Brahmi Script is deemed as the "best fit" for the edicts of Samrat Ashoka. India defined itself with due reverence to Samrat Ashoka.
Reference:
C. Sivaramamurti, "Indian Epigraphy and South Indian Scripts", Madras: Government Press, 1952
@Satish Babu: In my reckoning, language is India is not hindered by politics it suffers from lack of associated geopolitical acumen.
It is a belief that the script takes one to the intended experience with repeated usage. So, Indic scripts though stemming from the "mother language" script of Sanskrit and thus interrelated are really different.
My choice good reading is the 18 page paper attached.
I had a formal work with W3C. This paper is nice because of the immediacy of the associated pragmatics of moving ahead with the Indic Scripts for the purpose of W3C and at the same time scoping some thoughts as above.
Again this is only to provoke some thinking on the erudition enshrined in the Indic scripts. Someday, the mechinized algorithms may attempt this as well.
By the way, I must hasten to mention that the "Godhead" gives a certain degree of Universality by choice. Though travel is not an instinct within me, I score good on foreign travel as an in-service government employee. In India, "Godhead" is a "Personal Choice" and on ethical dilemmas language (Bhasha) is the best to position a "Personal Best Answer".
Please look into the slides made with thanks to several deliberations in ICANN.
Sharing an anecdote that has always come in handy for me:
When Albert Einstein met Charlie Chaplin in 1931, Einstein said, "What I admire most about your art is its universality. You do not say a word, and yet the world understands you." "It's true." Replied Chaplin, "But your fame is even greater. The world admires you, when no one understands you."
Gopal Tadepalli
Justine Chew Many thanks again for the easy paced webinar on the "Next Round of New gTLDs: An Overview" during the APRALO Policy forum meeting on Thursday 7 September 2023.
DNS is an application layer level idea always trying to break out of the Trasnport Layer that must find a mapping to IP Address in hte Network Layer.. The layers are from the ISO - OSI Refernce Model.
A Case in Point: The translation of Punycode sequences into the original encoding is the responsibility of the user agent (application installed on the user’s computer that connects to the server) in the browser. It is always possible to create ad-hoc punycode sequences to show the user a completely converted string at will. Both the browser and the useer can easily be misled.
A TLD helps businesses communicate information about their product, boost audience trust and engagement, and improve brand recall. Hence, both the generic top-level domain (gTLD) and country-code top-level domain (ccTLD) are important. Selecting one over the other can impact a brand, for better or for worse.
A ccTLD could be a good fit if a business mainly targets customers in a specific country. A gTLD might be a better choice if the goal is to reach a broader, global audience.
I wish that at ICANN we study both these TLDs in tandem.
Reason: New TLDs are all classified as gTLDs. Even those that seem geographically specific, like “.berlin,” are technically not considered ccTLDs. ccTLDs are invariably just two characters.
FOCUS: Geographical Names
There are more than 300 ccTLDs. The most popular is Tokelau's .tk, with 24.9 million registered domains. Close behind is China's .cn, with 24.49 million registrations. Unlike gTLDs, many ccTLDs follow certain restrictions or standard procedures for domain registrations. However, there are also open ccTLDs.
My Choice References:
#1:
United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names. (UNGEGN) at: https://unstats.un.org/unsd/geoinfo/geonames/About.htm
(Multilingual, multiscriptual dataset of names of countries, capitals and major cities)
ICANN may have to get to the Granulatiy of a Country from the consolidation that is now happening at the Region Level.
#2:
Gwilym Lucas Eades, The Geography of NamesIndigenous to post-foundational, Routledge, September 30, 2020
The Geography of Names makes the case that geographical names are transmitted memetically (i.e. as cultural units, or memes) through what Saul Kripke called communication chains.
Noted in the meeting Chat:
The majority of country names fall into just four categories:
The way countries get their names is seldom democratic,
I am trying to understand the rationale for the specification of APRALO.
The inforgraphic given below indicates that the "tribe" dictates the name of the country.
Understandably, the specific name of the "tribe" serves as a thumbnail for the specific geographical name and the associated geopolitics to some extent.
Gopal Tadepalli
Satish Babu Justine Chew
How much does Punycode contribute to Phishing Attacks ?
Is there any report answering this question? APRALO has the maximum scope for deploying IDNs.
To my mind, Punycode is an encoding system to represent a sequenced string of unicode characters via an ASCII character sequence,
Punycode makes the seuquenced string usable in domain names, without having to modify existing infrastructure and standards. Hence this question.
Gopal Tadepalli
@Justine Chew
Ref: Our work on the topic "Register of Skills & Interests (RoSI)"
I am sure you would appreciate that the need for "competency mapping" on the lines we began through the work on RoSI will become more purposeful sooner than later.
I promised to focus of "Technology Related Topics" and I am preparing some core set of slides now and then for depositing on the APRALO Policy Forum Wiki Page.
As ICANN celebrates 25 Years, I thought this set of slides titled "Snapshots from the History of the Internet" may be useful.
Gopal Tadepalli
Web Access to Full Stack
Useful Notes:
The ISO - OSI Reference Model specifies an "ideal" protocol stack. TCP/IP was developed before the ISO - OSI Reference model and does not explicitly contain all the layers.
Each vendor had its own way of communicating between its own computers, but that didn't enable communication with other vendors' computers. It soon became clear that an agreed-upon standard was needed that permitted computers from all vendors to communicate with each other. And that standard is TCP/IP.
"Network Programming" over TCP/IP has always been a wonderful challenge. In theory one can combine the Physical and Datalink Layer or make everything above the Network Layer become the Application Layer. It is the ingenuity of programming over the network that drives all distributed computing even today.
Observation: I have the highest respect for the ICANN Remit that does not look into the content of a website. However, as the DNS gets operational in the Application Layer, it is highly probable that ICANN deliberations can in an "indirect manner" go into cycles and circles.
MUST READ CAREFULLY AND SLOWLY:
Andrew S. Tanenbaum and David J Wetherall, "Computer Networks", Fifth Edition, Pearson Education (Prentice Hall), 2011.
Experiencing Indic Scripts [An Ongoing Study with Special Thanks to ICANN]