Another thoughts on TRANSITIONAL

Alireza Saleh saleh at
Sun Dec 6 08:16:40 CET 2009

I think TLD operators can help to solve this problem. In current 
situation, we should accept that some incompatibilities may occur in 
lower level of labels which are not under the control of the TLD 
operators. I think the only way to do the transition is at the time that 
registries start registering domains under the IDNA2008 regulations.

Registries should take an appropriate sunrise system before introducing  
domain-registration under INDA2008. For example,
1) Stop registering IDN names or check IDNA2003 version of each 
registration against their database and if it exists , do not allow that 
2) Contact current label owners who have domain names including 
MAYBE-CANDIDATE characters and ask them whether they want INDA2008 
variant of that or not
3) Begin normal registration after this Sunrise-Transitional period passed

This may require  close co-operation between ICANN and IETF to publish a 
guideline for that transition including policy and technical solutions. 
It may also require revisiting the EPP protocol or add an extension to 

- Alireza

Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 10:55:37AM +0330, Alireza Saleh wrote:
>> I don't understand what the protocol is trying to solve. If this is the 
> The idea behind what I suggested is just that a zone operator can say
> what their policy is, and clients can learn that, in a generalized (or
> generalizable) way.  I fully admit it's a giant and expensive means to
> the end, but it's the only way I know of signalling between the end
> points in this otherwise mostly-stateless interaction.
>> a domain-name and not only TLDs or SLDs 
>> that are directly under the control of zone operators.
> Surely every single existing RNAME in the DNS is directly under the
> control of some zone operator?
> A

More information about the Idna-update mailing list