Changing the values of domain names and the need for mapping

[John C Klensin]

--On Friday, February 20, 2009 10:28 -0800 Paul Hoffman
<phoffman at imc.org> wrote:

> 
> To be clear, I fully agree when the bundling / binding is done
> to cover the things we talked about in the original IDNA WG,
> such as homonyms and homonym-like names.
> 
> My specific concern here is when it is forced on registries
> based on bits-on-the-wire changes that we are proposing.
> Changing Those Two Characters to be PVALID either forces a
> change in registry operations and registrant operations, or it
> causes unpredictable and unexpected results for users of
> IDNA2003. This is the only part I am talking about.

It forces zones/registries to make decisions.   We have an
obligation -- operationally, morally, and from the charter-- to
identify the fact that a decision needs to be made.  We also
should help them identify some possible decisions, without
trying to constrain them by doing so.   We are doing those
things and, if you don't think we are doing it clearly or well
enough, please, as I requested earlier, send text and
explanations.  

We cannot make the decision for them, specify the decisions they
should make, or limit them to our range of options.   Doing any
of those things intrudes both on business decisions and on the
operational flexibility that the DNS is supposed to provide.

     john