[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New Internet Draft on registering IDNs
On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 09:31:09AM -0800,
Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@xxxxxxx> wrote
a message of 16 lines which said:
> Greetings. I have just submitted a new Internet Draft that gives
> suggestions on how to register IDNs. You can find a link to the draft
> at the web site for this mailing list at
> <http://www.imc.org/idn-reg-policy/>. Comments are, of course,
Well, to summary, I find it quite good, much simpler and more
understandable than draft-jseng-idn-admin-02, specially for non-CJK
> A "string" is an ordered set of one or more characters.
> This document discusses characters that have equivalent or
> near-equivalent characters or strings. The "base character" is the
Shouldn't we use "code point" instead of "character"?
> If the base character has more than one variant, the variants
> are separated by a colon (":", ASCII 0x3A). Strings are given without
> any intervening spaces
Isn't it a typo?
> A registry has three options for how to handle the case where
> the registration bundle has more than one label. The policy options are:
> 1) Allocate all labels to the same registrant, making
> the zone information identical to that of the input label.
> 2) Block all labels so they cannot be registered in the
> 3) Allocate some labels and block some other labels.
This entire scheme does not discuss financial issues. For instance, in
Option 1, it will mean that a registrant will get more labels than he
paid for. The registry will not be happy :-)
In Option 2, OTOH, it means that there is no option for the registrant
to activate some variants. Do you think this case (all variants are
blocked and some are allocated to the same registrant, if he chooses
so and if he pays, may be a smaller price than a "real" domain) is
covered by Option 3? If so, I suggest to rewrite it to make it
> Option 3 is likely to cause the most confusion with users because
> including some variants will cause a name to be found, bout using
> other variants will cause the name to be not found.
If the variants actually allocated are choosen by the registrant, it
is up to her to minimize confusion.