New version of strawman for IDNAv2

[John C Klensin]

--On Friday, February 27, 2009 18:25 +0330 Alireza Saleh
<saleh at nic.ir> wrote:

>> Can you please look at (2) below, and say which one of the 
>> alternatives (i) to (iv) you prefer?
> 
> I prefer (i) . Please notice that, there are also other
> factors cause visual confusions despite the rules are supposed
> to prevent them (e.g, inappropriate font ). For none
> Arabic-script user,  I can't see much difference if for
> example .com registry permits 1<ZWNJ>ong.com or 1ong.com as
> equivalent for long.com.

I do see two differences...

First, there are millions of zones ("registries") out there and
depending on none of them being operated by bad guys is
unrealistic.   In that regard, w<ZWNJ>ww.innocuous-name.com is
far more or a risk than 1<ZWNJ>ong.com because we can sensibly
expect Verisign (although perhaps not all TLD operators) to
block this.

Second, the problem is not about registries exclusively
dedicated to Arabic.  gTLDs will be under considerable pressure
(market and probably political) to register names from all
scripts and this implies that they will need to apply a
contextual rule --above and beyond anything in the protocol-- to
prevent ZWJ/ZWNJ in registrations except in a fairly large
number of scripts (Arabic is _not_ the only one).

    john