RE: [council] Mime-Version: 1.0

["Cochetti, Roger" <RCochetti@verisign.com>]

Oscar-

 

Thanks for the question:  If I understand your question correctly, the answer is that the VGRS contracts do not address that question.

 

And with regard to your second question, we will continue our multilingual test bed service and continue our commitment to convert to IETF standards.

 

Hope these answers are helpful,

 

Roger

 

Roger J. Cochetti
Senior Vice-President & Chief Policy Officer
VeriSign
(202) 973-6600
rcochetti@verisign.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Oscar A. Robles-Garay [mailto:orobles@nic.mx]
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2001 3:56 PM
To: council@dnso.org
Subject: [council] Mime-Version: 1.0

Roger

If AFNIC or the ccTLD Constituency wanted to propose a suspension,

then the proper time to have done so would not be a year after thousands of

contracts for testbed service have been entered into.

Does your contracts specify a time to put this names in normal operation?

The VeriSign Registry has made clear from the outset that it will migrate to

the IETF standard for IDN when that standard is finalized and that in the

testbed it will employ standards that facilitate that migration.  So there

is simply no question over whether the VGRS IDN service will be

non-standards-based.

What would you do if IETF find there is no way to have this service in an
apropriate way, "living" in the internet?

Thanks,

Oscar