Re: More detail: a sketchy idea for expressing zone policy saleh at
Wed Dec 9 23:26:25 CET 2009

Sorry i didnt make myself clear. my comment about web_browser specific was just my general feeling and of course it was not about this thread.
I think tld operators will enforce bundeling because they don,t want to loose their market due to bad policy. The only concern is make sure they understand the risk of not applying propper policy during transitional period. I think any other solution to enforce policy will remain forever. 

- Alireza

Sent from my Hero

----- Reply message -----
From: "Andrew Sullivan" <ajs at>
Date: Thu, Dec 10, 2009 1:31 AM
Subject: More detail: a sketchy idea for expressing zone policy
To: <idna-update at>

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 01:21:41AM +0330, Alireza Saleh wrote:
> (IMO) this mapping could be done by zone operators like bundling . 

Well, yes.  The suggestion I've made pretty much depends on registries
doing bundling.  But Shawn and others have been arguing that, since
bundling isn't anything mandatory (and if it were, and were permanent,
there'd be no reason to add the characters to the repetoire anyway),
there's a problem.  The point of my suggestion is to make it possible
to find out what bundling has been done, and to make it possible to
make intelligent choices based on whether it has been or not.

Note that there's nothing web-browser-specific about this.


Andrew Sullivan
ajs at
Shinkuro, Inc.
Idna-update mailing list
Idna-update at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Idna-update mailing list