Two-Character Letter/Letter Label Comments and Mitigation Measures
As of 13 December 2016, this page is no longer active. Please visit here for more information.
For comments submitted before 6 October 2015, view the archive of comments received.
| TLD | Two Characters | Comments from Government | Last updated | RO Mitigation Plan | RO Name | BRAND TLD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| auspost | bn | View Comments 2016-12-01 | 2016-12-01 | Yes | ||
| eus | bn | View Comments 2016-12-01 | 2016-12-01 | No | ||
| gdn | bn | View Comments 2016-12-01 | 2016-12-01 | No | ||
| seek | bn | View Comments 2016-12-01 | 2016-12-01 | Yes | ||
| smart | bn | View Comments 2016-12-01 | 2016-12-01 | Yes | ||
| stockholm | bn | View Comments 2016-12-01 | 2016-12-01 | No | ||
| vanguard | bn | View Comments 2016-12-01 | 2016-12-01 | Yes | ||
| xn--5tzm5g | bn | View Comments 2016-12-01 | 2016-12-01 | No | ||
| auspost | tw | View Comments 2016-11-24 | 2016-11-24 | Yes | ||
| comcast | tw | View Comments 2016-11-24 | 2016-11-24 | Yes | ||
| fido | tw | View Comments 2016-11-24 | 2016-11-24 | Yes | ||
| gdn | tw | View Comments 2016-11-24 | 2016-11-24 | No | ||
| natura | tw | View Comments 2016-11-24 | 2016-11-24 | Yes | ||
| nba | tw | View Comments 2016-11-24 | 2016-11-24 | Yes | ||
| pwc | tw | View Comments 2016-11-24 | 2016-11-24 | Yes | ||
| rogers | tw | View Comments 2016-11-24 | 2016-11-24 | Yes | ||
| smart | tw | View Comments 2016-11-24 | 2016-11-24 | Yes | ||
| vanguard | tw | View Comments 2016-11-24 | 2016-11-24 | Yes | ||
| xfinity | tw | View Comments 2016-11-24 | 2016-11-24 | Yes | ||
| xn--5tzm5g | tw | View Comments 2016-11-24 | 2016-11-24 | No | ||
| auspost | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | Yes | ||
| comcast | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | Yes | ||
| dupont | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | Yes | ||
| fido | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | Yes | ||
| gdn | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | No | ||
| natura | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | Yes | ||
| nba | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | Yes | ||
| pfizer | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | Yes | ||
| pwc | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | Yes | ||
| rogers | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | Yes | ||
| smart | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | Yes | ||
| vanguard | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | Yes | ||
| xfinity | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | Yes | ||
| xn--5tzm5g | ir | View Comments 2016-10-28 | 2016-10-28 | No | ||
| able | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| boo | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| bostik | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| cal | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| cbs | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| channel | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| chintai | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| comcast | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| dad | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| day | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| dclk | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| dev | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| dupont | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| eat | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| eco | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| esq | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| fido | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| fly | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| gbiz | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| gle | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| guge | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| hangout | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| map | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| meme | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| mov | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| natura | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| nba | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| new | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| pfizer | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| phd | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| prod | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| prof | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| pwc | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| rogers | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| rsvp | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| search | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| sfr | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| showtime | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| watches | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| xfinity | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| xn--flw351e | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| xn--kpu716f | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| xn--pbt977c | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| xn--qcka1pmc | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | Yes | ||
| zip | bn | View Comments 2016-10-14 | 2016-10-14 | No | ||
| dev | ka | View Comments 2016-10-08 | 2016-10-08 | No | ||
| able | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| boo | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| bostik | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | Yes | ||
| cal | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| cbs | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | Yes | ||
| channel | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| chintai | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | Yes | ||
| comcast | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | Yes | ||
| dad | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| day | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| dclk | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| dev | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| dupont | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | Yes | ||
| eat | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| eco | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| esq | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| fido | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | Yes | ||
| fly | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| gbiz | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No | ||
| gle | sg | View Comments 2016-10-06 | 2016-10-06 | No |
bn Comments
By Haji Hairul Mohd Daud Bin Haji Abd Karim, Senior Assistant Chief Executive, Regulatory & Resource Management Group, Authority for Info-communications Technology Industry for Brunei Darussalam, Regulatory & Resource Management Group
“At this stage, we are unable to agree to the release of the two-character label "bn" at the second-level under gTLDs.
Since the two-character label "bn" is assigned to Brunei Darussalam as per ISO standard 3166-1, and this two-character label is widely recognized both on and off the Internet as an identifier for Brunei Darussalam. The release of this two-character country code, at the second level under gTLDs will be misleading and confusing for Internet users. This applies equally to all two character country codes and not just to “bn”.
The use of “bn” at second level of any new gTLDs may also result in damaging or reputational harm to Brunei Darussalam and we want to protect the use of two-character country code “bn” from any association with illegal or undesirable content and also the manner of its use.
Furthermore, we are concerned that this will lead to a situation requiring governments and ccTLD managers to register the country code themselves to manage these risks described above. This course of risk mitigation will be resource-intensive and create unnecessary burdens on governments.”
tw Comments
By Lin, Mao-Shong, Deputy Director, Ministry of Transportation and Communications
I’m writing hereby to submit Taiwan government’s comments on the release of the “tw” label under the New gTLDs.
We object to the release of “tw” as SLD under all the above-mentioned New gTLDs for their registration by the corresponding Registry operators. We reserve the right to change position in this regard in the future.
The rationale of our objections are below:
Since “tw” label is the country code for Taiwan, the use of “tw” as SLD under these diverse New gTLDs would create confusion or concerns at multiple levels on our part, which include, but not limited to, ”dwarfing national dignity”, “violation of public order or good social custom”, “affecting the rights of domestic enterprises”, and “being prone to produce perplexity to our disadvantage”.
ir Comments
By H.S.Shahhoseini,, Advisor of Information Technology Organization of Iran, International Office
Please find following comment which is official statement of Iran ICT Deputy Minister and Head of Information Technology Organization of Iran. Similar letter had been sent to GAC Secretariat by email.
Dear GAC Secretariat
Re: Requests for Release of Two-Letter Second-Level Domains in gTLDs
As Islamic Republic of IRAN GAC Representative, I would like to express our concerns about the likelihood of confusion between "ir" and the corresponding ccTLD. We, hereby, ask the related authorities to inform us of any request including "ir" and other possibly two character labels which are similar to "ir" in order to concluding an explicit agreement with us for releasing Two-Letter Second-Level Domains in gTLDs.
So again we categorically reject any such release unless our explicit agreement is obtained.
Sincerely yours,
Nasrollah Jahangard
I.R. Iran GAC Representative
Deputy Minister of ICT and
Head of Information Technology Organization of Iran
bn Comments
By Haji Hairul Mohd Daud Bin Haji Abd Karim, Senior Assistant Chief Executive, Regulatory & Resource Management Group, Authority for Info-communications Technology Industry for Brunei Darussalam, Regulatory & Resource Management Group
As Brunei Darussalam GAC Representative, we hereby respectfully submit our comment with regards to the release of “bn” labels as second level domains.
Currently, we do not agree to the release of "bn" label at the second-level under New gTLDs.
We are concerned that the use of “bn” would create confusion in representing Brunei Darussalam. This applies to all Registry Operators who have requested or will be requesting for the release of “bn” labels at the second level domains.
Additionally, the use of “bn” at second level domain of any new gTLDs may inflict damaging or reputational harm to Brunei Darussalam if associated with illegal or objectionable content and the manner of its use. We wish to protect “bn” from such abuse.
To conclude, we wish to be notified of all Registry Operators request to use “bn” labels at the second level domains of all new gTLDs.
cn Comments
By Chang Pan, Director of operations, ban ma xiu (Beijing) information technology co., LTD
We are a startup from China and we are eager to own a perfect domain name in line with our products. In the future, we will strive to promote our products and we sincerely hope that .pro can be well-received in China. To sum up, we hope that the domain name can be approved. (Thank you for your help)
sg Comments
By Queh Ser Pheng, Deputy Director, Internet Resource Management, Policy & Competition Development Group, Infocomm Development Autority of Singapore
We hereby respectfully submit our comment regarding the release of letter/letter two-character labels as second level domains.
At this stage, we are unable to agree to the release of the two-character "sg" label at the second-level under gTLDs because of the concern that such use would create confusion with the ccTLD "sg" representing Singapore. Until further notice, this policy is to be applied to all gTLDs who have requested or will be requesting for the release of letter-letter two-character labels at the second level.
To elaborate further, we are open to considering the release of "sg" to registry operators who have robust framework in place to address concerns of government. We recognise there are legitimate and valid reasons for such use. However, we are of the view that it is prudent for ICANN to first put in place a holistic and robust framework before approvals can be given. More thoughts need to be given to the evaluation process and in particular the remedies available should a registry operator use the approved names in an undesirable manner. Besides possible confusion with the corresponding country code and/or country/territory name, we are also concerned with:
(a) The possible reputational harm if ".sg." is associated with illegal or objectionable content and/or manner-of-use; and
(b) The direct harm if ".sg." content or manner-of-use targets Singapore as a nation or Singapore entities (e.g., websites could masquerade as Singapore Government agencies).
ICANN's current policy focuses only on the "initial release" process. There needs to be considerations given to "post-release" issues. As such, the ICANN framework should include:
(a) A recourse for the government/country code manager to issue a notice to object to the content and/or manner-of-use that is misleading, questionable, objectionable or contrary to the country’s reputation and laws. There should be an effective and robust process acceptable by the government/country code manager for the registry operator to address the concern; and
(b) Provisions to require the registry operator to re-seek approval from government/country code manager should there be material changes in ownership or organisational control (for example merger with or acquisitions by another entity).
In addition, ICANN must be committed to take actions against the registry operator should they fail to comply with the framework (e.g. implement a process for country/territory to raise objections to ICANN and for ICANN to take appropriate remedial actions such as remove/delete/revoke affected names).