looking up domain names with unassigned code points

JFC Morfin jefsey at jefsey.com
Mon May 12 20:22:59 CEST 2008

At 18:07 12/05/2008, Tina Dam wrote:
>Vint, this is true. ICANN staff have recommended to the .SU 
>operators not to open for IDNs in this matter and also offered to 
>assist or recommend other experts to assist in deploying IDN.SU in a 
>secure manner, just FYI.

The problem is that your recommendation is no more technically secure 
from a registry point of view as there is no ICANN/WIPO warranted 
conversion tool, but it is legally unsecure. A Registry sells a 
registration and a nameserver support of ASCII labels. This is its 
RFC and ICP-1 defined job. With a WIPO/ICANN UDRP. What the 
registrant does with the names is not its cup of tea. It never knows it.

Why alone, among the whole Internet, second level Registry Managers 
should consider the use of the domain names they sell, for one single 
user application among millions, and take technical and IP 
responsibility for it which is not even legally worked out by WIPO. 
Moreover than phishing is carried at third level and above, in using 
IE7 and Firefox, with any existing DN.

There is a Consultation going on in France by the Government over the 
French ccTLD Registries Management as Public Services. One of the 
france at large answer backed by several lawyers is that .fr and the 
other French TLDs behave like .su, as long as there is not a State 
control and warranty. We will see what will be the answer. The 
Registry cannot be legally responsible of what the users may do. More 
over if it operates by State delegation. ".gr" Registry Manager has 
already explained what they do. The same, IE7 and Firefox have also 
described the different way they support IDNs, is the Registry 
Manager to be legally responsible?

Now let suppose there is an extended Punycode algorithm? Common sense 
leads to think that modern symbols like famous logos will be of 
interest in mobiles and their code point for sale. This logocode 
business can be very fruitful; or regulated by law. This is one of 
the reasons why I prefer ISO 10646 to Unicode as the same reference 
table. Are we discussing archaïc symbol or modern logos and music tunes ?


More information about the Idna-update mailing list