Bundling of Domain Names and DNAME
Erik van der Poel
erikv at google.com
Thu Dec 3 18:58:44 CET 2009
Vaggelis, thank you for raising this issue on the namedroppers list.
Namedroppers, I would like to clarify one item below.
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 7:56 AM, Vaggelis Segredakis <segred at ics.forth.gr> wrote:
> Recently, as a member of the discussion of the IDNABIS WG I tried to help
> resolving these issues by explaining them to that group. However that group
> is not free to completely re-design the IDNA protocol to something else but
> rather with small steps to reform it to something with fewer issues.
> Unfortunately, on this process, one of the changes that are implemented lead
> to even more names that have to be bundled together for each registrant.
> This makes it even more significant to break this chain of cost for the end
The IDNAbis WG drafts have not been published as RFCs yet. Currently,
the drafts make Final Sigma (Unicode U+03C2) PVALID, but this issue is
currently being discussed in the WG.
More information about the Idna-update