Browser IDN display policy: opinions sought

Andrew Sullivan ajs at
Tue Dec 13 00:59:37 CET 2011

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 12:16:01PM -0500, John C Klensin wrote:
> Andrew, sure, but...   This comes back to the assumptions that: 
> 	-- all registries are good guys and enforce whatever
> 	rules they make.

No, because you can check those rules yourself in your resolution
context: look at what you are looking up and compare it to the rules
to see whether it conforms.  Indeed, if that's not good enough, you
have this problem anyway.

> 	-- all registrars are good guys, with neither motivation
> 	nor will for getting around the rules.
> 	-- if either of the above fail, there is someone with
> 	both the authority and willingness to require that the
> 	rules be enforced and to enforce that requirement (or to
> 	enforce the rules itself, but that is even more
> 	farfetched).
> Now, unless one believes in miracle turnarounds from history,
> all of the above assumptions are demonstrably and massively
> false.  If they were only occasionally false, Gerv would still
> need to decide whether his obligation to protect users required
> some additional measures.  But, despite believing strongly that
> ICANN should be held responsible for stepping up to the role in
> this that I read into their charter and bylaws, I think spending
> energy on a policy that requires believing all three of the
> above today should get you, not just a pony, but an opportunity
> on a discount price on a bridge I understand is for sale.
>     john
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at

Andrew Sullivan
ajs at

More information about the Idna-update mailing list