IDNs in the root

[Tina Dam]

What I'm saying is that we have several proposals for solutions. We need to pick what is the best. It will not cover everything, but on the other hand I have not seen serious breaking-the-root problems so far and things have been implemented for years. We can make things better for sure and I'm all for that, but we also can't wait for ever. There has to be a balance.


----- Original Message -----
From: idna-update-bounces at alvestrand.no <idna-update-bounces at alvestrand.no>
To: idna-update at alvestrand.no <idna-update at alvestrand.no>
Sent: Fri Jan 23 09:25:30 2009
Subject: Re: IDNs in the root

On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 09:13:17AM -0800, Tina Dam wrote:

> I agree that the mapping-discussion is a problem. However, this
> topic has now been discussed for years and a decision need to be
> made.

I'm sorry, but that is dangerous nonsense.  What you are arguing is
that we don't know how to solve this problem, so we should just
release the protocol with a possibly dangerous segment in it on the
Internet, and hope it's all ok.  That's a false dichotomy.  I
appreciate that there are non-technical pressures to get something
out.  But they're just one variable in a complicated trade-off.  I
have a hard time believing that consideration trumps everything else.

Frankly, I think we'd be better to do _nothing_ than not come up with
something serious around the local mappings.  What I'd prefer to see,
however, are some tighter rules about what may be allowed there.
 
A
-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at shinkuro.com
Shinkuro, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Idna-update mailing list
Idna-update at alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 3613 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20090123/3ea090c9/attachment.bin