|Vote Open||Vote |
|Vote Close||Date of Submission||Staff Contact and Email||Statement Number|
|10.07.2014||Introduction of Two-Character Domain Names in the New gTLD Namespace|
|Dev Anand Teelucksingh||08.08.2014||11.08.2014 20:00 UTC||11.08.2014 23:00 UTC||11.08.2014 23:00 UTC||15.08.2014||16.08.2014 23:00 UTC||16.08.2014|
Please click here to review the reason for abstention from Fatima Cambronero
LACRALO started to discuss this issue very late, when the vote period was already open to vote in ALAC.
In LACRALO we had a lot of confusion about this topic with contradictory positions.
Because of this lack of understanding of this topic and these contradictions some members of LACRALO asked to the ALAC members to vote the statement in a negative way.
I considered that in this scenario my best option was to vote in abstention.
Having detected this confusion we agreed to Dev to invite him today to explain this topic. I hope the region could have a clear understanding of the topic from Dev and Olivier explanations in the call today.
Olivier suggested in the call to explore the idea of having a Webinar on this topic. I support this suggestion.
Please click here to review the reason for abstention from Rafid Fatani
With regards to the Two-Character Domain names in the New gTLD Namespace, I feel it might confuse ‘less ICT literate’ users in developing countries that have always expected that two letter TLDs represent some sort of official capacity. However having understood the other side to this argument, I am not completely convinced that there are mechanism in place to support and educate these specific subset of users of this confusion. For this reason I abstained.
FINAL DRAFT VERSION TO BE VOTED UPON BY THE ALAC
Many of the RSEP requests are for the release of two character ASCII labels not on the ISO 3166-2 1 alpha 2 standard. However, the ISO 3166-2 1 alpha 2 standard is not a static document ; it will be updated to reflect changes to countries and territories. For example, BQ, CW and SX were added to the ISO 3166-2 1 alpha 2 standard in late 2010 (see http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_3166-1_newsletter_vi-8_split_of_the_dutch_antilles_final-en.pdf). This gives rise to a potential disparity in the implementation of Specification 5, Section 2 where future countries and territories would be treated differently than those countries and territories on today's ISO 3166-2 1 alpha 2 list.
However, two character ASCII labels at the second level have been made available for some gTLDs and many ccTLDs. Shorter domains are more desirable to potential registrants and two character ASCII labels can be used for alternative meanings than the one for the ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 standard. For these reasons, absent any DNS-related security or stability issues, the ALAC believes that all the restrictions of two character ASCII labels at the 2nd level within a TLD should ultimately be removed, and has no problem with the current exceptions being approved.
Many of the RSEP requests are for the release of two character ASCII labels not on the ISO 3166-2 1 alpha 2 standard. However, the ISO 3166-2 1 alpha 2 standard is not a static document ; it will be updated to reflect new countries and territories. For example, BQ, CW and SX were added to the ISO 3166-2 1 alpha 2 standard in late 2010. (http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_3166-1_newsletter_vi-8_split_of_the_dutch_antilles_final-en.pdf).
If RSEP requests are approved by ICANN and the registries make available two character ASCII labels not on today’s ISO 3166-2 1 alpha 2 list, what happens when future countries and territories with new 2 character codes assigned by ISO want the same protections as per Specification 5, Section 2 and find such codes already allocated by the registries?