Valid/invalid Label

Patrik Fältström patrik at frobbit.se
Sat Feb 28 10:09:41 CET 2009


And this is why I do not understand why you propose alternative (1)  
that is _only_ limiting what a registry on highest levels in the tree  
does, and not solutions where we in protocol block what can be done at  
any level.

    Patrik



27 feb 2009 kl. 21.23 skrev Alireza Saleh <saleh at nic.ir>:

> Theoretically yes, but it is not possible to blame the registry  
> service
> about whatever the owner of the domain wants to create under his  
> domain.
> The current DNS topography shows it is important to keep second level
> labels safe. Consider a company owns x.com and having a legal service
> under y.x.com, is possible for that company to create another host  
> such
> as z.x.com for phishing against y.x.com ?
>
> Currently many registries have some regulations under their TLD  
> without
> having any control of the sub-domains to protect against trademarks,
> confusion and etc.
>
> Alireza
>
> Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 01:38:34PM +0330, Alireza Saleh wrote:
>>
>>> I think that a possible solution would be considering virtual links
>>> between one or some sections of Unicode and one or some TLDs.
>>>
>>
>> I'm not convinced that "TLD" is the only important level, though.
>> Surely it's entirely possible for someone to want (for instance)
>> [U-label].blogspot.com.  No?
>>
>> A
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>


More information about the Idna-update mailing list