Skip to main content

Public Comments Requested on ccNSO Working Group Paper on Delegation, Redelegation and Retirement of ccTLDs

The Chair of the ccNSO's working group on delegation, re-delegation and retirement of ccTLD’s is pleased to announce the publication of the working groups Issue Analysis report [PDF, 1.16 MB]. The objective of the report is to inform and solicit input and comment from the community on the classification methodology developed by the working group and the issues identified and classified using that methodology, in particular on the following topics:

  • Is the methodology developed and employed adequate for the purposes of the DRDWG?
  • Do the policy statements identified provide an adequate baseline to evaluate the actual practices of IANA and the ICANN Board relative to delegation, redelegation and retirement of ccTLDs?
  • Are there other policy statements which are applicable to the work of the DRDWG? Should they be included in the baseline?
  • Does the documentation identified provide an adequate representation of the actual practices of IANA and the ICANN Board relative to delegation, redelegation and retirement of ccTLDs?
  • Should other cases be included for analyses?
  • Is there other documentation which is applicable to the work of the DRDWG which should be analyzed?
  • Was the methodology properly applied to the cases?

To be most helpful you are kindly requested to submit your comments by 15 September 2010 at: An archive of all comments received will be publicly available.

Background and next steps:

According to its charter the purpose of the delegation, redelegation and retirement Working Group (DRDWG) is to advise the ccNSO Council whether it should launch a policy development process to recommend changes to the current policies for delegation, re-delegation and retirement of ccTLDs. The working group has published its first progress report in February 2010 and second progress report in June 2010. Both the charter and the progress reports can be found at here.

The Working Group will continue its work during this consultation period. After closure of the comment period, the working group will finalise this paper taking into account the public comments and input.

More Announcements
Domain Name System
Internationalized Domain Name ,IDN,"IDNs are domain names that include characters used in the local representation of languages that are not written with the twenty-six letters of the basic Latin alphabet ""a-z"". An IDN can contain Latin letters with diacritical marks, as required by many European languages, or may consist of characters from non-Latin scripts such as Arabic or Chinese. Many languages also use other types of digits than the European ""0-9"". The basic Latin alphabet together with the European-Arabic digits are, for the purpose of domain names, termed ""ASCII characters"" (ASCII = American Standard Code for Information Interchange). These are also included in the broader range of ""Unicode characters"" that provides the basis for IDNs. The ""hostname rule"" requires that all domain names of the type under consideration here are stored in the DNS using only the ASCII characters listed above, with the one further addition of the hyphen ""-"". The Unicode form of an IDN therefore requires special encoding before it is entered into the DNS. The following terminology is used when distinguishing between these forms: A domain name consists of a series of ""labels"" (separated by ""dots""). The ASCII form of an IDN label is termed an ""A-label"". All operations defined in the DNS protocol use A-labels exclusively. The Unicode form, which a user expects to be displayed, is termed a ""U-label"". The difference may be illustrated with the Hindi word for ""test"" — परीका — appearing here as a U-label would (in the Devanagari script). A special form of ""ASCII compatible encoding"" (abbreviated ACE) is applied to this to produce the corresponding A-label: xn--11b5bs1di. A domain name that only includes ASCII letters, digits, and hyphens is termed an ""LDH label"". Although the definitions of A-labels and LDH-labels overlap, a name consisting exclusively of LDH labels, such as"""" is not an IDN."