[At-Large] At-Large Use of Country and Territory Names as Top Level Domains

Wed Sep 23 18:26:08 UTC 2015

So, then one would have alpha-3 code gTLDs being run with GNSO policies, in competition with alpha-2 code ccTLDs being run with ccNSO policies (+ GAC and other governmental policies as the case may be).

I don't think so!

BTW, that would be a clear invitation for numbers of governments to intervene directly in GNSO matters. Is that what one wants?

Furthermore, ICANN, having decided that the IDN ccTLDs would be delegated to the same Registries as hold their existing ccTLDs ('fast track'),
someone would no doubt point to that precedent if and when the question of delegating the alpha-3 codes might arise.

Regards

CW (In my personal capacity with no axe to grind: the alpha-3 code EUR will in any event be embargoed because it is also in ISO-4217, currency code for the €.)

PS:	 Has anyone asked ISO? My recollection is that at the time the European Commission asked ISO specifically for permission to use the EU alpha-2 code as a ccTLD (they agreed).
	A fortiori, ISO might have views about how their alpha-3 codes could be used.

On 23 Sep 2015, at 17:18, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Olivier, all
> 
> I understand the sentiments and I somewhat agree with you on the fact the there is need for some form of "power" distribution. I will personally say apart from power, orderliness and structure is another aspect we may be loosing once the 3 letter is opened up in the manner proposed. This was actually why I added a +1 to John as i read his mail to mean "let the the 3 letters be open to all" and maintain the 2 letters to ccTLDs".  I don't know of any instance where a country(new) could not get alpha-2 codes. The alpha-2 is closer to the work of IANA as its what is also used within the IETF within IETF as well.
> 
> That said, there is also merit in reserving the corresponding alpha-3 letter of each country and then opening up to the Gs. The advantage in that is that some level of consistency will be ensured so the registry managing for instance .ng will also manage .ngr
> 
> Regards
> 
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com> wrote:
> Hello Tim & all,
> 
> I am not sure I'm 100% in agreement here. I have concerns that so far we've had ccTLDs that were running country-related TLDs and now we might see more Country Codes, this time 3-letter country codes, used and run as gTLDs - hence falling under the remit of the GNSO = more US-based legislation and less legislation that happens in the country itself. This, to me, smells like a concentration of more power within ICANN's walls, when if we insisted on keeping CCs (2 & 3 letters) in ccNSO hands, wouldn't it do the opposite?
> Kindest regards,
> 
> Olivier
> 
> 
> On 23/09/2015 14:08, McTim wrote:
>> +1 to Karl and John.
>> 
>> Potential user confusion is not something I am concerned about as much as censorship and giving governments more sway inside ICANN.  The GAC has already won far too many concessions OUTSIDE the GNSO policy arena, we shouldn't give them any more for minor reasons.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> McTim
>> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Karl Auerbach <karl at cavebear.com> wrote:
>> On 09/22/2015 12:39 PM, John Levine wrote:
>> 
>> Every geographical area that's eligible for a country code has a two
>> letter country code, and lots of existing software has special cases to
>> treat two letter TLDs differently.  (Yes, we know about the IDNs.)
>> There are plenty of two letter codes left, they're not going to run out.
>> 
>> I can think of no reason to reserve the remaining 3 letter country codes
>> other than as a makework project for bureaucrats with too little to do.
>> Surely we have enough of those already.
>> 
>> I fully agree with John Levine on this.
>> 
>>         --karl--
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> At-Large mailing list
>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>> 
>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> At-Large mailing list
>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>> 
>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> 
> -- 
> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
> http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
> 
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
> 
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Seun Ojedeji,
> Federal University Oye-Ekiti
> web:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
> Mobile: +2348035233535
> alt email: seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
> 
> Bringing another down does not take you up - think about your action!
> 
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
> 
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20150923/1a7c61f0/attachment.html>