RE: [council] NC agenda item 3 GAC - latest revision

["Peter de Blanc" <pdeblanc@usvi.net>]

Title: Message

I support this statement-  although I am a bit confused by the following... Is it a typo?

 

Peter de Blanc

---------------------------------

 

5. That there are sound technical reasons for the reservation of the two-letter country codes in ISO 3166-1 but that these reasons to do extend to country names.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@dnso.org [mailto:owner-council@dnso.org] On Behalf Of Philip Sheppard
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 4:26 AM
To: council@dnso.org
Subject: [council] NC agenda item 3 GAC - latest revision

I am happy to revise the proposed statement to:

- add in Milton's changes to part 4

- add a technical comment on two-letter country codes (new 5)

 

(Ref Ken's comment on scope the GAC communiqué also says:

 

"The GAC also draws the attention of ICANN and the Registries to the fact that a large number of other names, including administrative sub-divisions of countries and distinct economies as recognised in international fora , may give rise to contested registrations"

 

To me this indicates a wider scope than dot info.

 

I attach a new draft (v 7).

 

Philip