Changing the values of domain names and the need for mapping

[Cary Karp]

> VeriSign has many domain names registered in .com that are encodings
> of strings that use Esszet. To the best of my knowledge, no one from
> VeriSign has said on this list or in any other forum that VeriSign is
> prepared to deal with the very real effects (not "side-effects") of
> current registrations under the IDNA2003 protocol (not "guidelines").
> The same is true for PIR and .org. Further, the one registry that has
> said it can deal with the effects of the Esszet change has not
> definitively said how they will do so.

This topic has been discussed at length by the gTLD registries in
several forums. I partcipate in many of those discussions, as well as in
the present one. Although I am not prepared to make any assertions on
behalf of the gTLDs that you name, my sense is quite clearly that they
all understand the consequences of the action we are proposing, and are
prepared to undertake the resultant effort. Devising specific
implementation plans is a proprietary concern, and you cannot reasonably
expect details to appear on this list.

I agree that it would be useful for the gTLDs to chime into the
discussion here, directly, but the fact that they have not done so
hardly supports the assertion that they are opposed to a protocol
change that will ultimately increase the base of useful (and therefore
commercially interesting) domain names.

/Cary