[governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg) similar to other Latin ccTLDs?

Sun Nov 6 13:35:42 EST 2011

Imran, all,
I really would like to be as helpful as possible, but nothing is
non-official :) and it really must be clear I cannot and am not
speaking on behalf of ICANN.

I hope the following might help instead. I am not arguing that this is
a solution of any kind for the specific case at hand, but just
providing some options and some information.

First, please recall that the Fast Track Process is limited in it's
scope, and that ICANN staff simply is following that process and
cannot make any deviations from it. One of the limitations unde the
Fast TRack Process has to do with confusable strings.

Confusability between strings is and has been a highly debated subject
when it comes to the introductions of IDNs. And rightfully so. We have
seen the issues early on (early 2000) in the second-level IDN
implementations, where no barrier or protection was in place against
confusable strings. The result was phishing attacks and browser
developers that were reluctant to implement IDNs.

On a first implementation of IDNs at the top-level I think, with that
experience, it is entirely appropriate to have restrictions in place
to avoid issues - that is, avoid issues for the end-users (primarily
registrants and people that use the addresses by accessing the sites,
but also registrars, registries and application developers).

As it was said alot among groups of these back in the early IDN days:
One day some somebody is going to make a lawsuit against a phishing
attack. Who will they sue: the registrant of the phishing domain name,
the registrar, the registry, or the browser that send them to a place
they did not intent to go to, or someone else? The answer is not
straightforward, but we definitely saw application developers not
wanting to be liable for that. Hence reluctant to implement IDNs and
if that is the case we are nowhere because IDNs are not usable.

See more here: http://blog.icann.org/2008/11/compliance-with-idn-technical-requirements/

I can say that I fully agree with an initial, careful approach, that
then can be expanded later on if it turns out it was too restrictive.
See more below on future developments.

However, and unfortunately the limitations means that not all
countries can (i) participate in the process, e.g. countries where the
official languages are based on Latin, and/or (ii) get their first
choice or preferred string as an Internationalized ccTLD.

But, it was agreed in the community that it was better to allow a
limited set of Internationalized ccTLDs to move forward and be
delegated, than force those where no questions or issues remained to
wait until a solution was available for all.

Of options looking forward I see several. Again, I would not claim
that either are applicable or desired by any country, but simply
listing them for your reference.

1) If the preferred string, or first choice was not available for
delegation through Fast Track, then select the second choice instead.
I would probably make that a strong recommendation because a) it
results in a quick delivery of an Internationalized ccTLD, and b) it
avoid any conflicts or contentions against new gTLDs down the road.

A country could for example decide to get the entire country name as
Internationalized ccTLD. Some countries have already done so.

2) Working with the ccNSO on their policy development process for the
"long-term policy for Internationalized ccTLDs". This is the policy
that is intended to be implemented as a replacement or update of the
Fast Track Process. One obvious area would be to review the existing
restrictions to see if any of these were too restrictive and could be
eased. (note: I am not saying that they are or they should, it would
require an analysis).

I hope that is helpful and I am happy to answer any questions I can.

Tina

On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:47 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>As I am sure you understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you
> really need to ask ICANN staff.
>
> Yes, I understand. But you had been with ICANN, so, I think that you would know and may share with us un officially.
> And you may also guide us if it is documented at any early discussion or ultimate document.
>
>>I can say that my opinion is that the IDN development is for the benefit of its users. It will also be the users that decide if they
> want to use it or not.
>
> Yes, user* will have to decide to which option they adopt and not, however, at their-turn*.
>
> In order to discuss about the rights of a consumer, it is first step to define the consumer first.
> The consumer or prospective consumer are the 1. Registry Operators, 2. The Users / Users Community.
> If we can define the user(s) (single/plural) in terms of ICANN's IDN ccTLD Fast Track Program, we will be in a better position to understand their rights and to advocate their case very well.
>
> Thanks
>
> Regards
>
> Imran Ahmed Shah
>
>
>
>>On Sun, 06 Nov 2011 05:45 PKT Tina Dam wrote:>As I am sure you understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you>really need to ask ICANN staff.>>I can say that my opinion is that the IDN development is for the>benefit of its users. It will also be the users that decide if they>want to use it or not.>>>On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Imran Ahmed Shah <ias_pk at yahoo.com> wrote:>> Dear Tina,>> I am glad to seen you on the IGC CS.>> I was really thinking today, to invite you to join IGC.>>>> Thank you for offering your support. Yes, we will need your support, and there are many queries that you may answer.>>>> First and important question is that what was the ICANN's Vision and scope of utilization of an (any) IDN ccTLD allocation?>>>> It is obvious that many countries will be able to apply for ccTLD in non latin characters, but my question is about the usage, scope of the usage.>> Who will get benefit out of it after the allocation and enabling a IDN
>  ccTLD?>>>> Thanks>>>> Imran Ahmed Shah>>>>>>>On Sun, 06 No >As I am sure you understand I cannot speak on behalf of ICANN. So you
> really need to ask ICANN staff..
>
>
> v 2011 01:41 PKT Tina Dam wrote:>Hi everybody, just letting you know that I signed up to your list and>look forward to constructive dialogue.>>On the Bulgarian IDN ccTLD I likely will not be able to support a>letter, but I am happy to answer any questions or anything else I can>do to be helpful.>>Tina>>>On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:>>>> To the extent possible, a statement regarding "mutual mistake of fact" is>> usually grounds to get out of a contract or deal or understanding, and into>> a new process or negotiation.   It also allows both parties to save face, in>> that both have made a mistake.  I am not familiar enough with the details of>> the communications and its history to know if this would possibly apply or>> not, but if there is some basis for it, I'd advocate serious consideration>> of making mutual mistake an element of a letter urging reconsideration of>> this (non)decision.>>>> Paul>>  Lehto,
>  J.D.>>>> 2011/11/5 Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>>>>>>> Hi,>>>>>> I think this is a good idea.  If we can create an IGC consensus letter>>> that>>>>>> a. discusses this issue>>> b. asks for a transparent review of the issue>>> c. asks for a general process by which any ICANN Staff decision on string>>> confusability have a method for transparent review and appeal.>>>>>> I do not think we need to recommend a solution, but we might recommend>>> policy considerations consistent with the Affirmation of Commitments that>>> would govern such a review and apeal.>>>>>> We might also want to copy the leadership of ALAC when the letter is sent>>> asking for their support of such an appeal mechanism.>>>>>> avri>>>>>> On 5 Nov 2011, at 00:07, Ian Peter wrote:>>>>>> > Avri wrote:>>> >>>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix>>> >> it.>>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot>>  of
>  people on that Board have courage.>>> >>>> > Perhaps a carefully drafted letter from this Caucus would be useful in>>> > this>>> > regard?>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> From: Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> >> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Avri Doria <avri at psg.com>>>> >> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:58:57 -0400>>> >> To: IGC <governance at lists.cpsr.org>>>> >> Subject: Re: [governance] Is really Bulgarian Cyrillic .бг (.bg)>>> >> similar to>>> >> other Latin ccTLDs?>>> >>>>> >> Well there is a new Board now, with a new chair.>>> >> All they need to do is recognize the mistake and tell the staff to fix>>> >> it.>>> >> Takes a little courage, but a lot of people on that Board have courage.>>> >>>>> >> avri>>> >>>>> >> On 4 Nov 2011, at 03:16, Daniel Kalchev wrote:>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> On 03.11.11 18:31, Paul Lehto wrote:>>> >>>> It would seem that there either is, or should be, a process to "call>>> >>>> the>>> >>>> question" as they say in>>
>  parliamentary procedure.  If not, a motion>>> >>>> can be>>> >>>> made for a decision, or a letter sent citing undue delay and calling>>> >>>> for a>>> >>>> decision (with or without additional clarifying expertise appended to>>> >>>> it). A>>> >>>> person familiar with whatever exists in terms of procedure can>>> >>>> recommend the>>> >>>> best format or vehicle for forcing a decision.>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> There is no formal process to question the outcome of the IDN Fast>>> >>> Track>>> >>> applications. By definition, the only possible communication is>>> >>> between ICANN>>> >>> "staff" (whatever that means) and the original applicant. Ironically,>>> >>> even>>> >>> that country's Government does not have formal way to communicate with>>> >>> ICANN>>> >>> on the matter.>>> >>>>>> >>> Nevertheless, we are exploring every available possibility for some 18>>> >>> months>>> >>> now, to understand why this situation continues to persist. ICANN>>> >>>>>
>  staff are>>> >>> very wary of any such discussions and I perfectly understand their>>> >>> position.>>> >>> More so, that the principal that handled this case, Tina Dam, is no>>> >>> longer>>> >>> with ICANN.>>> >>> My understanding is that ICANN now recognizes they made a mistake. But>>> >>> they>>> >>> not only made the mistake to accept blindli this "expert opinion".>>> >>> They also>>> >>> made the mistake to make several statements already to the effect that>>> >>> "this>>> >>> is it, accept it or go away". Therefore, the problem at the moment is>>> >>> how>>> >>> ICANN admits their mistake and how they go out of the rising political>>> >>> problem.>>> >>> I have made many proposals on how to address this, but this has been>>> >>> slow>>> >>> process.. Nobody has given up anyway and it now seems inevitable>>> >>> things will>>> >>> go on a more global and more politicized forums.>>> >>>>>> >>> Daniel>>> >>>>>
>  ____________________________________________________________>>> >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:>>> >>>   governance at lists.cpsr.org>>> >>> To be removed from the list, visit:>>> >>>   http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>>> >>>>>> >>> For all other list information and functions, see:>>> >>>   http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance>>> >>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:>>> >>>   http://www.igcaucus.org/>>> >>>>>> >>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >> ____________________________________________________________>>> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:>>> >>     governance at lists.cpsr.org>>> >> To be removed from the list, visit:>>> >>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>>> >>>>> >> For all other list information and functions, see:>>> >>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance>>> >> To edit your profile and to find
>  the>>  IGC's charter, see:>>> >>     http://www.igcaucus.org/>>> >>>>> >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> > ____________________________________________________________>>> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:>>> >     governance at lists.cpsr.org>>> > To be removed from the list, visit:>>> >     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>>> >>>> > For all other list information and functions, see:>>> >     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance>>> > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:>>> >     http://www.igcaucus.org/>>> >>>> > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t>>> >>>> >>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:>>>     governance at lists.cpsr.org>>> To be removed from the list, visit:>>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>>>>>> For all other list
>  information>>  and functions, see:>>>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:>>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/>>>>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t>>>>>>>>>>> -->> Paul R Lehto, J.D.>> P.O. Box 1>> Ishpeming, MI  49849>> lehto.paul at gmail.com>> 906-204-4026 (cell)>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:>>     governance at lists.cpsr.org>> To be removed from the list, visit:>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>>>> For all other list information and functions, see:>>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:>>     http://www.igcaucus.org/>>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t>>>>>>>____________________________________________________________>You received this message as
>  a subscriber on>>  the list:>     governance at lists.cpsr.org>To be removed from the list, visit:>     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>>For all other list information and functions, see:>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:>     http://www.igcaucus.org/>>Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t>>>
>
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t