[ALAC] [IDN-WG] [APAC-Discuss] The Problem of IDNs

[Rinalia Abdul Rahim]

Thanks for clarifying, Evan.

The staff session is important because ICANN has to define its role and
scope for dealing with UA.
Staff is in the midst of gathering views and options. If there is a view on
appropriate role and scope for ICANN in tackling the problem, that session
would be a good place to raise it.

At the moment, both views of limited and more expansive role are being
advocated in the ICANN community. I think it is really important for the
ALAC and At-Large to consider carefully what role is appropriate for ICANN
to support end user needs on this matter.

It would be good if the At-Large community had sufficient time to do this
in London.  My worry is that the 30 minute Hot Topic session may not be
sufficient.

Best regards,

Rinalia
On May 21, 2014 5:12 PM, "Evan Leibovitch" <evan at telly.org> wrote:

> Sorry if I misstated.
>
> I did not mean to say that UA is not a problem, just that:
>
>    - For Latin-script gTLDs, UA is primarily a problem for the domain
>    industry but is of little urgency for end users
>
>    - For non-Latin script gTLDs the problem is more important and ought
>    to be addressed because of years of neglect. But let's not get caught up in
>    hyperbole that calls this a massive innovation
>
>    - Hampering the progress of UA is that its slowness to arrive has
>    already forced alternatives to emerge, and these alternatives are already
>    established and succeeding
>
> This is clearly of more interest (and urgency) in the IDN world because it
> has been so long in coming.
>
> However my larger point is that, given the success rate of ICANN in its
> previous remedial repair programs, ICANN itself might not be the best
> driver of a good UA program, especially in AP and EMEA.
>
> - Evan
>
>