[APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review

[Edmon]

based on the received feedback please find an updated version of the comment
attached.

I have asked for a couple more days to send in our comment.  Would like to
finalize and send out then.

 

2 main updates:

1. clarified that best current practice is for Chinese IDN

2. clarified issue on visual similarity

 

Edmon

 

 

 

 

 

From: Edmon [mailto:edmon at isoc.hk] 
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:30 AM
To: 'Hong Xue'
Cc: 'APRALO'
Subject: RE: [APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review

 

Hi Hong,

 

3. was actually in response to the ".bulgaria" issue.  Sometimes, within
context, visual similarity does not mean actually causing confusion.  So, I
am saying actually the opposite... before an application is rejected simply
because of visual similarity, other aspects need to be considered within the
context of IDN.  For example, 2 chinese characters may look alike to
non-chinese speaking people, but for chinese speakers (within context) they
could be clearly distinguished.

 

2. I had want for it to mean that it is the best approach for Chinese IDN
TLDs.  Perhaps should make it more clear.

 

Edmon

 

 

 

From: Hong Xue [mailto:hongxueipr at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 8:41 PM
To: Edmon
Cc: APRALO
Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] response to IDN ccTLD Fast Track review

 


Dear Edmon,

Many thanks for promptly drafting the document. I've some quick comments for
your reference. 

3. The issue of visual similarity of IDN TLDs is not a good measurement of
confusing similarity.  The new gTLD process should avoid the repeating of
such mistake.


Could you kindly elaborate this? Do you believe measurement of confusing
similarity should be extended to aural or meaning? 

2. The implementation of IDN Variant TLDs at the root for Chinese IDN TLDs
has proven to be successful.  The same implementation, more specifically,
concurrent NS delegations for the Primary and Preferred IDN Variant TLD
strings, is the appropriate technical implementation for Chinese IDN TLDs,
compliant with CDNC (Chinese Domain Names Consortium) recommendations, and
is the current best approach to maintain the security and stability of the
Internet.

 

Indeed Chinese Community has developed mature implementation measures for
variant management. I fully agree what you state 

"Future applications for Chinese IDN TLDs with IDN Variants should follow a
similar approach in terms of technical implementation at the root." However,
ALAC had made statement that Chinese experience may not be generalized and
its variant management may not be applicable to other scripts, such as
Arabic. So it is a bit interesting to state it "is the current best
approach", although it is no doubt the best for Chinese character set.

 

Best,

 

Hong

 

 






On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Edmon <edmon at isoc.hk> wrote:

Hi Everyone,

As discussed on our monthly call yesterday, please find attached a draft for
our response to the IDN ccTLD Fast Track review
(http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-22oct10-en.htm).

Hong / Charles / Cheryl, please help shepherd the document perhaps also
through our WG model at the IDN WG...

In any case, please provide your comments asap, we will try to take all the
comments received by Jan 29 (Saturday), turn around a final version by Jan
30 (Sunday) for final circulation, and then submit our comments in at the
end of Jan 31 in time before the close of the public comment period.

Edmon




_______________________________________________
APAC-Discuss mailing list
APAC-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss

Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org




-- 
Dr. Hong Xue
Professor of Law
Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL)
Beijing Normal University
http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/> 
19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street
Beijing 100875 China

 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IDN ccTLD Fast Track Review (FINAL DRAFT).docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 13303 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/apac-discuss/attachments/20110131/9bff75b6/IDNccTLDFastTrackReviewFINALDRAFT.docx>