Registry restrictions (was: Re: Domain names with leading
digits (Re: Determining the basic approach))
phoffman at imc.org
Mon May 5 21:35:22 CEST 2008
At 1:12 PM -0400 5/5/08, John C Klensin wrote:
> * There will be things that cannot be done strictly in
> the protocol that are, nonetheless, important. We hope
> that they can be handled by registry restrictions and
> believe that registry restrictions (heavyweight or
> lightweight and independent of the methods used) are an
> important part of the picture, not just desirable.
> * There will be things that cannot be done strictly by
> registries that are, nonetheless, important. We hope
> that they can be handled by protocol provisions (at
> registration time, lookup time, or both) and believe
> that such protocol provisions are an important part of
> the picture, not just desirable.
> * So, even though we are not, in general, prepared to
> tell registries what provisions and restrictions they
> should (or must) apply, we believe that some things are
> better done by registries than by protocol.
> * We also believe that there are some things that
> dangerous or treacherous enough, or that raise long-term
> issues that are potentially problematic enough, that
> they have to be checked in the protocol, not just left
> to registration-time activity. The most important
> example of this involves characters that are invisible
> out of context, notable the joiners, but we believe that
> special measures for unassigned and disallowed
> characters are also in order.
>That obviously leaves three sets of questions for the WG:
>(1) Is that model reasonable?
>(2) What very specific things should be pushed off to the
>registries (remembering that "registry" equals "any zone in the
>DNS") and which ones left in the protocol (at registration time,
>lookup time, or both)?
Longer discussion. I believe that "which labels can appear to the
left or right of a particular IDN label" is appropriate for that, but
could be wrong about that.
>(3) For any given thing we try to push off to the registry, are
>we offering advice or do we think we have some leverage on
>telling registries what they "MUST" do?
The former, only. We can't force anyone to do anything.
More information about the Idna-update