Unregistered code points and new prefixes (was: Re: sharps(Eszett))

[Martin Duerst]

Hello Cary,

At 18:47 08/03/09, Cary Karp wrote:

>The gTLD registries are forbidden by the terms of their contracts with
>ICANN from accepting the registration of any labels with hyphens in the
>third and fourth positions unless an explicit further agreement has
>been signed in which the registry binds itself to follow the ICANN IDN
>Guidelines,
>
>       http://icann.org/topics/idn/idn-guidelines-26apr07.pdf
>
>which do not permit prefixing random strings with xn--.
>
>The ccTLD registries are not subject to the same across the board
>constraint. The resulting user confusion is significant and the
>retroactive imposition of remedial policies is not a viable means for
>addressing this problem (nor is simply dismissing or tolerating it).

Can you be more specific? What users (e.g. people registering
domain names, end users browsing the Web,...)? Significant to
what degree, according to whom? What are the actual consequences?
(Any pointers to documents, similar to those given by Stephane,
appreciated.)

Also, as far as I understand, there are many other differences between
ccTLDs. Some are very strict in whom they accept for registration
(e.g. requiring some legal proof of residence,...), others are very
liberal. Some hand out second-level domains (e.g. .de, .ch,...),
others hand out third-level domains, or both second-level domains
and third-level domains (e.g. .co.jp, .or.jp, .jp)). Also, policies
and checks against registering similar domain names (such as
GOOGLE.example vs. G00GLE.example), and conflict-resolution
procedures sure will differ quite a bit for different ccTLDs.

It might be very easy to claim:
"The resulting user confusion is significant and the
retroactive imposition of remedial policies is not a viable means for
addressing this problem (nor is simply dismissing or tolerating it)."

and then go on and try to revise the RFCs for ASCII-only domain names.
As far as I know, nobody is asking for changes for ASCII-only domain
names. What makes IDNs different?

In my opinion, due to the fact that IDNs are much closer to the very
wide human cultural variety, the chances are that the need for diversity,
at least for some aspects, may actually be greater for IDNs than for
ASCII-only domain names.

Regards,   Martin.



#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp