| Close Date | Statement Name | Status | Assignee(s) and | Call for Comments | Call for Comments Close | Vote Announcement | Vote Open | Vote Reminder | Vote Close | Date of Submission | Staff Contact and Email | Statement Number |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18.10.2012 | Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings | 14Y, 0N, 0A | Rinalia Abdul Rahim (APRALO) | 29.10.2012 | 02.11.2012 | 02.11.2012 | 03.11.2012 | 07.11.2012 | 08.11.2012 | 09.11.2012 | Bart Boswinkel bart.boswinkel@icann.org | AL/ALAC/ST/1112/2 |
| Comment/Reply Periods (*) | Important Information Links | |||
| Comment Open: | 29 August 2012 | |||
| Comment Close: | 18 October 2012 | |||
| Close Time (UTC): | 23:59 UTC | Public Comment Announcement | ||
| Reply Open: | 19 October 2012 | To Submit Your Comments (Forum) | ||
| Reply Close: | 9 November 2012 | View Comments Submitted | ||
| Close Time (UTC): | 23:59 UTC | Report of Public Comments | ||
| Brief Overview | ||||
| Originating Organization: | ccNSO IDN country code Policy development process working group 1 (IDN ccPDP WG 1) | |||
| Categories/Tags: |
| |||
| Purpose (Brief): | The IDN ccPDP WG 1 reports on the draft policy recommendations for the selection of IDN ccTLDs associated with the territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 (IDN ccTLDs) within the framework of the IDN country code Policy Development Process. | |||
| Current Status: | The IDN ccPDP WG 1 seeks public comment on its draft recommendations as part of the ccNSO IDN policy development process. | |||
| Next Steps: | The WG will closely review all submitted comments to determine at its reasonable discretion to modify its recommendations. According to Annex C of the ICANN Bylaws and its charter the WG is not obligated to include all comments made during the comment period, nor is it obligated to include all comments submitted by any one individual or organization. The Working expects to formally publish its Final Report by the end of this calendar year (2012) , and submit this to the IDN ccPDP Issue Manager. | |||
| Staff Contact: | Bart Boswinkel | Email: | Bart.Boswinkel@icann.org | |
| Detailed Information | ||||
| Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose | ||||
After adoption and implementation the overall policy for the selection of IDN ccTLD strings is intended to replace the current Fast Track Process rules. The IDN ccPDP WG 1 agreed that the starting point for the overall policy should be the criteria and processes of the Fast Track Process and the recommendations should take into account 3 years of experience with and the two reviews of the Fast Track Process. The overall policy is limited to the selection of IDN ccTLD strings. Until the introduction of IDN ccTLDs under the Fast Track Process, ccTLD strings were limited to the two letter codes obtained from the ISO 3166-1 list designating the Territory. As this mechanism could not be used for the selection of IDN ccTLD strings, an alternative method was developed was introduced which is commonly referred to as the Fast Track Process. As under the Fast Track Process the delegation of IDN ccTLDs shall be in accordance with the delegation process of (ASCII) ccTLDs. Thus the recommendations contained in the report build on and are complementary to the delegation, re-delegation and retirement processes applicable to all ccTLDs. This means that once the selection process of an IDN ccTLDstring has been successfully completed, the policy, procedures and practices for the delegation, re-delegation and retirement of ccTLDs apply. This also implies that any suggestion to change the policy for the delegation, redelegation and retirement of ccTLDs is out of scope of the IDN ccPDP. The recommendations describe (at a high level) the decisions and requirements, activities, roles, and responsibilities of the actors involved in the processes. It is anticipated that further detail may need to be added by ICANN staff as a matter of implementation and it is recommended that the ccNSO reviews and approves the final planning document, prior to implementation. In the report the overarching principles (Section 2) and the criteria and requirements (Section 3) for the selection of the IDNccTLD string are presented first. The purpose of the overarching principles is to set the parameters within which the policy recommendations have been developed, and should be interpreted and implemented. The processes, procedures and required documentation are described in section 4. Finally in Section 5 (Miscellaneous) general recommendations, such as the review of the policy, are proposed. In each of the sections 2, 3, 4 and 5 the recommendations are listed first. If considered useful informative notes and comments are included. These notes and comments are not part of the recommendations themselves, but are included to provide depth and colour to the recommendation. | ||||
| Section II: Background | ||||
| For the Fast Track Process the criteria and requirements for selection of the IDN ccTLD string as well as the process elements were described throughout both the IDNC WG Final Report and the Final Implementation Plan. The WG agreed to present the criteria and requirements for the selection of IDN ccTLD strings separately from processes, procedures and documentation. | ||||
| Section III: Document and Resource Links | ||||
The Report can be found at: http://ccnso.icann.org/workinggroups/draft-recommendations-idn-cctld-selection-29aug12-en.pdf [PDF, 232 KB] Additional Resources:
| ||||
| Section IV: Additional Information | ||||
In meeting its purpose, the WG focused on, without limitation, the proposals and recommendations of the IDNC Working Group and the Implementation Plan based on the work of the IDNC WG, and has taken into account the experiences under and reviews of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process. As this WG will undertake its activities within the framework of the IDN ccPDP, the limitations on the scope of a ccPDP, in particular by Article IX of and Annex C to the Bylaws, shall limit the scope of the WG's work in a similar manner. If issues outside this scope become apparent to the WG, the Chair of the WG should inform the ccNSO Council of the issue so that it can be taken into account and dealt with more appropriately. As a result the chair of the WG has informed the ccNSO Council of the issues pertaining to the use of country and territory names in ASCII as TLDs. The ccNSOCouncil has established a Study Group to look into this matter. | ||||
(*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not guaranteed to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or decision-making that takes place once this period lapses.
FINAL DRAFT
Please click here to download a copy of the PDF below.
FIRST DRAFT
ALAC Statement on the Draft Recommendations Overall Policy for the Selection of IDN ccTLD Strings.
The At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) commends the International Domain Names (IDN) country code Policy Development Process Working Group 1 for the comprehensiveness of its draft policy recommendations on the IDN ccTLD String Selection Criteria, Requirements and Processes for territories listed in the ISO 3166-1 list. We note that the recommendations are based on the previous work of the IDNC Working Group and we are pleased to see that the recommendations reflect the learning drawn from the implementation of the IDNccTLD Fast Track Process over the past few years.
We wish to reiterate the significance and importance of IDNs, including IDN Top Level Domains (TLDs) at both the generic and country code levels. We believe that IDNs are crucial for enhancing diversity and multilingualism on the Internet.
We observe that the draft recommendations do not address the issue of variant TLDs and instead contain a placeholder in Section J, which points out that issues pertaining to the management of such TLDs are still being discussed in the ICANN community and will be added later.
We believe that the draft recommendations should indicate that the issue of variants is urgent and need to be addressed in a timely manner. Concurrently, the draft recommendations should also affirm that the outcomes of the variants discussion pertaining to the Label Generation Ruleset (LGR) for the Root Zone would be binding and applicable to all TLDs (including ccTLDs), given that the overarching principle of the LGR process is the security and stability of the Root Zone, which is shared by all Internet users.
