[council] FW: [gtld-com] Council gTLDs

Philip, and other Councilors

I would prefer that we have at least an acknowledgement of the importance of IDNs, even though we are not addressing them in this advice. I offer for consideration a sentence about future consideration of IDNs, and a mere acknowledgement of their importance. I think we will look somewhat naive if we don't at least note that they are important and may be the subject of future policy making.I know that some might say that the Board didn't ask us about IDNs, but we are, after all, Council, and can

provide some extra value when we believe it relevant. :-)

Secondly, I have added a possible sentence which describes that there was no consensus in particular around the discussion of the meaning of the word "structured".

This was merely an effort to further make it clear that while there was a good deal of discussion, there was no agreement. That should help further to capture the input from some of the members of Council.

Other changes are more stylistic, such as changing "putative" to "prospective".

Thank you all for your comments and suggestions on version 5 of the committee's conclusions. I have attempted to included all of these in the attached version 6 which is submitted for adoption at the next Council meeting.

Important changes from the previous version:

- following the Council resolution, separation of objectives in expanding the name space AND criteria for future registries. The objectives are based on previous Council or Board conclusions. This should overcome some of the concerns about applicability raised by Tom, Bruce, Chun et al.

- deletion of all references to IDNs as requested by Chun and others. If anyone believes this is too draconian and believe some statement is required please make a proposal.

- editing of the paragraph describing the different perspectives of Council members as to the interpretation of structured. I believe this is an important clarification, as the Board may well have similar diversity.

Please remember this is a committee report recommending future work. It is not definitive. It also seeks to include the opinions of each participating group.

I hope that this sixth version will be acceptable to Council.

Philip