Dear All,<br><br>Please send all responses to questions below to Chris Disspain <<a href="mailto:ceo@auda.org.au">ceo@auda.org.au</a>>.<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/10/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Anne-Rachel Inné
</b> <<a href="mailto:annerachel@gmail.com">annerachel@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Dear All,
<br><br>This letter is from Chris Dispain, Chairman of the ccNSO at ICANN. Please share with any ccTLD managers you know. Thanks.<br><br><br>Dear ccTLD Manager,<br>I am writing to you, in my capacity as Chairman of the Country Codeames Supporting
<br>Organisation (ccNSO), about the introduction of ccTLD Internationalised Domain Names (IDN<br>ccTLDs). The input I am requesting from you is very important and your response will be<br>much appreciated.<br>At the end of this email is a Background and References section that provides some
<br>background information and links to various documents.<br>Based on work done by the ccNSO and discussions amongst ccTLD managers in all regions<br>the ccNSO has taken the first step to launching a Policy Development Process to set the
<br>overall policy for IDN ccTLDs.<br>At this stage, the ccNSO is also discussing whether or not to recommend that the ICANN<br>Board consider a fast track/interim approach under which some IDN ccTLDs could be<br>delegated while the overall policy is being developed. To help with those discussions we need
<br>to find out the level of interest in your territory and that is why I am writing to you.<br><br>While community feedback has encouraged the ccNSO to explore levels of interest in a fasttrack/<br>interim approach to IDN ccTLDs, this is the first of many steps that would have to be
<br>carefully and successfully taken towards that end and it is generally accepted that any<br>implementation would have to be in compliance with current policies and procedures. Some<br>of these that may be relevant are set out in the Background and References section below.
<br><br>I would be grateful if you would answer the following questions:<br>1. Do you believe that the local community in your territory has a pressing need for an<br>IDN ccTLD?<br>2. If so, is there yet agreement in your territory on the scripts and the string within the
<br>script(s) for which delegation of an IDN ccTLD would be sought, and could you<br>indicate which strings and scripts are of interest?<br>3. Do you believe the delegation of an IDN ccTLD under a fast track/interim approach
<br>would be of interest to your community?<br><br>The fast track/interim approach will be discussed by ccTLD managers at the ICANN meeting<br>in Los Angeles. So, it would be most helpful if you could respond by 26 October 2007.
<br><br>Background and References<br>In the Domain Name System, a ccTLD string (like .jp, .uk) has been defined to represent the<br>name of a country, territory or area of geographical interest, and its subdivisions as identified
<br>in ISO 3166-1, and is represented by 2 US-ASCII characters<br>(<a href="http://www.iso.org/iso/country_codes/iso_3166_code_lists/english_country_names_and_cod" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://www.iso.org/iso/country_codes/iso_3166_code_lists/english_country_names_and_cod
</a><br>e_elements.htm). This method of identification was adopted for use in the Internet through<br>RFC 920, dated October 1984, and reaffirmed through RFC 1591, dated March 1994. All<br>ccTLDs in use today are taken directly from the ISO 3166-1 list or from the list of
<br>exceptionally reserved code elements defined by the ISO 3166 Maintenance Agency.<br>The implementation of IDN ccTLDs introduces the (apparent) use of characters outside the<br>US-ASCII character set (for example characters in Cyrillic, Chinese, Arabic, and other scripts)
<br>for domain name strings.<br><br>In initial discussions by the ccNSO members, other ccTLD managers and ICANN's<br>Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) a number of policy questions were identified and a<br>"Questions and Issues Paper" was submitted to the ICANN Board of Directors
<br>(<a href="http://www.icann.org/topics/idn/ccnso-gac-issues-report-on-idn-09jul07.pdf" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.icann.org/topics/idn/ccnso-gac-issues-report-on-idn-09jul07.pdf
</a>). It became<br>clear that the development of the required policy for IDN ccTLDs to resolve the issues raised
<br>was likely to take a minimum of 2 years. It also became clear that such a time frame was a<br>major concern for a number of ccTLD managers who have expressed there is a pressing need<br>for an IDN ccTLD in their territory. Because of this, the concept of a fast track/interim
<br>approach began to be discussed. In those discussions it was thought that it might be<br>possible to find a method to allow the introduction of a limited number of IDN ccTLDs while<br>the overall policy was being developed.
<br><br>Policies and procedures that may be relevant to the delegation of an IDN ccTLD under a fast<br>track/interim approach include:<br>the IDNA protocol standards (<a href="http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-</a><br>11may07.htm);<br>RFC 3454 (<a href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3454.txt" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3454.txt
</a>);<br>RFC 3490 (<a href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3490" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3490</a>);<br>RFC 3491 (<a href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3491.txt" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3491.txt</a>);<br>RFC 3492 (
<a href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3492.txt" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3492.txt
</a>);<br>RFC 1591 and associated procedures for delegation of a country code top level domain<br>(<a href="http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1591.txt" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1591.txt</a>)<br>The GAC principles <a href="http://gac.icann.org/web/home/ccTLD_Principles.rtf" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
http://gac.icann.org/web/home/ccTLD_Principles.rtf</a>.<br>Following consideration of the "Questions and Issues Paper", and statements of the GAC and<br>ccTLD managers on a fast track/interim approach the ICANN Board has requested the ccNSO
<br>to explore both an interim and an overall approach to IDN ccTLDs associated with the ISO<br>3166-1 two-letter codes and to recommend a course of action to the Board taking the<br>technical limitations and requirements into consideration
<br><a href="http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-29jun07.htm#m" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-29jun07.htm#m</a>.<br>At its meeting on 2 October 2007, the ccNSO Council launched a Policy Development Process
<br>(ccPDP) by requesting a PDP Issues Report and appointing an Issues Manager. This ccPDP<br>has been launched to develop an overall approach, which includes finding solutions for the<br>matters raised in the "Questions and Issues Paper".
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Anne-Rachel Inne