Skip to main content

Letter from Kevin E. Brannon to Paul Twomey Regarding VeriSign WLS

6 May 2003

Kevin E. Brannon
Preston, Gates & Ellis LLP

Re: Status of Reconsideration Requests RC 02-5 and RC 02-6

Dear Mr. Brannon:

This is in response to your 9 April 2003 letter to Dr. Twomey concerning the VeriSign Wait-Listing Service ("WLS") proposal, which was the subject of ICANN Board resolution 02.100 adopted on 23 August 2002. As indicated in your letter, two reconsideration requests (submitted by Dotster and VeriSign Registry) are currently pending regarding that resolution.

As you know, during 2002 the ICANN community went through an intensive review of ICANN's mission and its processes and structures supporting accomplishment of that mission. This process was guided by the Committee on Evolution and Reform, which launched a community-based Accountability Framework Assistance Project to design improvements to ICANN's reconsideration, independent review, and other accountability mechanisms. After publishing a "Preliminary Framework" on 29 July 2002, the Assistance Project issued its final "Recommendations Regarding Accountability" on 23 August 2002. Those recommendations called for significant revisions to improve the reconsideration and independent review processes. Over the next several months these and other reform measures were, after extensive community discussion, embodied in New Bylaws, which define improved independent review and reconsideration mechanisms that replace the former policies on these topics.

Your letter inquires about the status of Dotster's (RC 02-5) and VeriSign's (RC 02-6) reconsideration requests. Those requests were submitted after the final "Recommendations Regarding Accountability" were issued and the task of replacing the former policies had begun. Once the New Bylaws (with the new reconsideration and independent review mechanisms) became effective on 15 December 2002 and the transition period began, it became necessary to review the internal processes for handling reconsideration matters, as well as to ensure that the two pending reconsideration requests were handled appropriately in the context of the transition to the new procedures. As a result, the Reconsideration Committee's recommendations on both requests are still incomplete.

After reviewing the schedule with the Reconsideration Committee, I am authorized to state that the Committee's goal is to issue completed recommendations on both requests in time so that the Board may consider the recommendations no later than its Montreal meeting on 26 June 2003.

Your letter also inquires about ICANN staff discussions with VeriSign concerning WLS. As you know, resolution 02.100 authorized the ICANN President and General Counsel to conduct negotiations on behalf of ICANN toward appropriate revisions to the .com and .net registry agreements between ICANN and VeriSign to allow VeriSign to offer the WLS service, under the additional conditions stated in that resolution. Although preliminary discussions have occurred regarding how the new service might be reflected in the agreements, these discussions have not been concluded in view of the pendency of Reconsideration Requests 02-5 and 02-6.

Finally, please note that my 3 November 2002 message to you requested that all communications to ICANN regarding VeriSign's Reconsideration Request 02-6 be copied to your opposing counsel, Philip L. Sbarbaro at <>. I assume that the failure to copy Mr. Sbarbaro on your 9 April 2003 letter was due to inadvertence; please take care in the future to copy Mr. Sbarbaro on correspondence concerning VeriSign's reconsideration request.

Best regards,

Louis Touton
ICANN General Counsel

cc: Nancy Victory, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information
Philip L. Sbarbaro, Esq.
Paul Twomey, President and CEO, ICANN
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."