IDN example TLDs (2606bis)

[Tina Dam]

> On Friday, July 11, 2008 3:14 PM, Frank Ellermann wrote:
>
> Hi, an update wrt IDN test + example TLDs in version 09
> of the draft:
>
> - No problems with the 11 IDN test TLDs were reported.
>   That's apparently good enough, IFF you are sure that
>   IDNAbis sticks to some A-label + U-label terminology.
>
> - Almost no support to reserve IDN example TLDs so far,
>   unfortunately.  If you want to change this please get
>   a WG consensus on public record.  The 11 IDN example
>   SLDs are low hanging fruits, but not low enough for a
>   "domain grabbing" stunt without strong IETF backup.


Just a clarification on this part. ICANN is reserving the .test strings used in the wiki. It was a part of the test plan to never let these TLD go into any kind of production environment where users could make registrations under them. In addition this reservation has been made part of the new TLD allocation processes that currently are under implementation.

> - This WG isn't interested to adopt the "reserved TLDs"
>   draft as work item, or is it ?  [I've no difficulties
>   to read the WG Charter, but maybe I need the question
>   on public record.]
>
> I'd like to get those 4+11+1 "reserved TLDs" out of the
> way, before any attempts to fix the RFC 1123 <toplabel>.


If the IETF should decide to formalize this is some way then ICANN will naturally follow that as well. For example, while I am focused on the .test TLDs, you mention the SLDs.

Tina