Re: Mississippi Hißes
John C Klensin
klensin at jck.com
Sun Dec 13 22:58:36 CET 2009
--On Sunday, December 13, 2009 22:04 +0100 Patrik Fältström
<patrik at frobbit.se> wrote:
> On 13 dec 2009, at 21.43, John C Klensin wrote:
>> But we do have worked examples of its having been done, and
>> done at fairly large scale, so this is really another example
>> of why the registries should (and will, IMO) make their own
>> decisions and of why the IETF would be overreaching by trying
>> to create a "one size fits all" policy that tells registries
>> what to do independent of local considerations and decisions.
> One example why this might be important is that even if
> registries agree that "two registrations of ß and ss can be
> allowed if the registrations are made by THE SAME
> registrants", different registries might have different
> mechanisms of deciding how to evaluate whether two registrants
> are THE SAME.
> It must be up to the registry.
> My point in commenting on what Alexander wrote was that just
> because (which I think is for example the case in .SE) it is
> extremely hard to synchronize bundled domains _after_
> registration (i.e. keep the bundle a bundle), it is not so
> hard to take care of the bundling at time of registration.
> I.e. even if one or two or fifteen things might be hard, maybe
> one or three are possible (and make the transition MUCH better
> for the end user).
More information about the Idna-update