IDNAbis spec

Vint Cerf vint at
Wed Nov 4 15:50:52 CET 2009

there is no way to guarantee this uniformity; nor was the WG able to  
define every possible case in which problems would arise. The range of  
possibilities is too great given the huge number of new symbols  
introduced by IDNA. This was debated extensively during the last 2  
years and that is the working group consensus as I see it.


On Nov 4, 2009, at 9:18 AM, Gihan Dias wrote:

> 2009-11-04 ප.ව. 3:41 දින, Vint Cerf ලිව්වා:
>> the WG concluded that the
>> registry or registrar had to be cognizant of this kind of anomaly and
>> reject problematic registration requests.
> Unfortunately, it is impossible to make sure *all* registrars (or  
> even all registries) would uniformly handle problematic requests.
> We need mandatory rules for registrations, which are checked by  
> software in lookups.
> Gihan
> LK Domain Registry / Sri Lanka IDN Task Force
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Idna-update mailing list