Patrick, Apologies for the late response, I was on paternity leave, and still behind on my email.
Comments inline. Regards, Gustavo On 4/22/16, 22:53, "regext on behalf of Patrik Fältström" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >Comments (some of this can also be fund in SSAC document SAC-060 23 July >2013): > >1. It is not clear how permutations of strings are to be calculated (by >whom, and how) in the case confusability risks might arise. For example >by the use of language tables or other mechanisms like LGRs. There are two places where permutations may need to be calculated: * Trademark registration in the TMDB. In this case, the matching rules defined in "Explanatory Memorandum: Implementing the Matching Rules" (https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/about/trademark-clearinghouse/matching-rules -24sep12-en.pdf) are used by the TMV (i.e. the company receiving the trademark registrations) to calculate permutations, if any. * Domain name registration path. Registries, as described in their Registry Agreement, must follow the "IDN Implementation Guidelines" (https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/implementation-guidelines-2012-02-25 -en). Per the Registry Agreement, each Registry may define their IDN-variant policies. Section 4.1.3 of the RPM Requirements makes this clear to Registry Operators (i.e. https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/about/trademark-clearinghouse/rpm-requirement s-30sep13-en.pdf). > >2. The term "leftmost" is a bit confusing when talking about labels in >DNS. I propose using "first" as in logical order. We only use A-labels in algorithms in the Internet-Draft; I think "leftmost" works, no? > >3. The matching algorithm is not described, who is implementing it etc. The scope of this Internet-Draft is to define the technical interfaces to allow Registrars, Registries, TMV and TMDB to interact. Regarding the matching algorithms, please see answer to 1 above. > >4. There are no instructions on how to handle cases where the matching >algorithm in TMCH is different from matching algorithm one "expect" >("one" as in the trademark holder). Sorry, I didn't get the question, could you please rephrase? > > Patrik > >On 22 Apr 2016, at 22:39, [email protected] wrote: > >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>directories. >> This draft is a work item of the Registration Protocols Extensions of >>the IETF. >> >> Title : ICANN TMCH functional specifications >>Author : Gustavo Lozano >> Filename : draft-ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec-00.txt >> Pages : 60 >> Date : 2016-04-22 >> >> Abstract: >> This document describes the requirements, the architecture and the >>interfaces between the ICANN Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) and Domain >>Name Registries as well as between the ICANN TMCH and Domain Name >>Registrars for the provisioning and management of domain names during >>Sunrise and Trademark Claims Periods. >> >> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec/ >> >> There's also a htmlized version available at: >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-regext-tmch-func-spec-00 >> >> >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >>submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at >>tools.ietf.org. >> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> I-D-Announce mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ regext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
