Visually confusable characters (2)

Asmus Freytag asmusf at
Mon Aug 11 10:19:26 CEST 2014

On 8/10/2014 9:36 PM, Patrik Fältström wrote:
> On 11 aug 2014, at 02:42, John C Klensin <klensin at> wrote:
>> ICANN's authority is relevant only if one tries to project TLD
>> LGR tables and rules, or other restrictive global registration
>> guidelines on DNS registration activities lower in the tree or
>> by what ICANN sometimes calls non-contracted entities.
> Let me make this stronger.
> ICANN has control over the root zone, but even for the root zone one can ask what power ICANN has to reject a certain request for say an IDN ccTLD. We do know ICANN is in discussions with various parties that have requested strings ICANN has rejected, and movie at 11.
> Everything else is "less control". Specifically as John says with the non-contracted parties, and even less than that with parties not even participating in the ICANN processes. Like some ccTLDs.


no need actually :)

We all agree that the best that can happen is that any successful 
conclusion of the TLD project will reflect expertise that other parties 
might want to utilize simply by copying, or at least emulating.
> This is why SSAC recommended strongly ICANN to concentrate on LGR for the root zone. And if that goes well, it will be used automatically by parties lower down the tree. Including the TLD registries (regardless of whether they are contracted parties, part of the ICANN process or not).




More information about the Idna-update mailing list