ICANN Variant Issues Project initial definitions document
J-F C. Morfin
jfc at morfin.org
Tue Jul 19 15:15:05 CEST 2011
Dear Andrew and colleagues,
1. As far as the IETF technology is concerned, ICANN is the
facilitator of the "ICANN community" (cf. ICANN IDV Variant Issues
Project Initial Definition Project - end of the leading Note to
readers) just as in any other users' communities. IDNA2008 has
actually documented that users' communities had an important role to
play in the IDNS deployment. As such, a proper IETF place to debate
the users' layers support issues is the iucg at ietf.org non-WG mailing list.
2. The IDNA Charter states: "The constraints of the original IDN WG
still apply to IDNABIS, namely to avoid disturbing the current use
and operation of the domain name system." and "This work is intended
to specify an improved means to produce and use stable and
unambiguous IDN identifiers."
Since ICANN is specifically referring to IDNA2008, if ICANN's or any
other users communities' propositions could disturb the current use
and operation of the domain name system, and the production and use
of stable and unambiguous IDN identifiers, it would mean that the
IDNA2008 document set was not complete enough and would require an
additional document (not a revision).
Since the Charter states: "This working group will be providing
extended public review of the output of a design team that has been
working on improvement of the IDNA specifications", it would mean
that the design team's work was not completed and should, therefore,
3. At the current stage, the design team's work does not look fully
completed and the IDNA2008 has added fuel to call for and assist in
- we saw it with Patrik Falström over the last version of Unicode.
- we see it with the IAB road map and John Klensin's RFC and
works (and others' concerns)
- we see it though Paul Hoffman and John Klensin's I_D, within
which the ICANN VIP work should be included.
- my own commitment to the ML-DNS to encapsulate the DNS as the
stable core of a more versatile use together with RFC 3890-3895
[underlying the Internet architectural principle of subsidiarity, at
the same level as the principle of constant change (RFC 1958) and of
the principle of simplicity (RFC 3439)], has opened up another way to
consider the digital plex with the Internet as one of its cores. BTW
I apologize for my delayed follow-up, which is due to personal
constraints. However, the work is indeed underway: since it takes
full advantage of the Internet and the DNS architectural stability to
build around them it is much larger than what I thought I could only
document and then help developing. I need to experiment first, and,
therefore, develop a prototype, before I can document the whole thing.
- we can also see it now through the ICANN VIP endeavor.
This being considered, the "design team" should be resumed and
enlarged to one or a few experts from all the concerned lead users'
communities. The iucg at ietf.org or the idna-update at alvestrand.no or
any other private list would do. The charter would be to expend the
IDNA2008 "after-sales" support to users' communities, perhaps on a
permanent basis through a non-WG mailing list?
I would also like to note that after two years of experience, I plan
to review the <http://iucg.org/>http://iucg.org site in order to
better address the expectations of the IETF users' community and
welcome the ICANN, IUse, continental, @large, etc. communities that
use to provide occasional input (often on a private basis) that I
address through the site rather than a constant flow of comments,
since there is not yet an IETF users' Internet use oriented debate
(as the VIP work exemplifies it). This work should be carried out this summer.
4. Concerning the VIP specific concern, I disapprove the use of
variants in any DNS root file. This is not only because it can become
tricky but maily because IDNA2008 is a success because there is no
mapping on the network side. Variants are mapping inside the DNS,
while IDNA2008 kept the DNS untouched. However, this does not prevent
me to consider variants in the IDNS virtual root matrix, and to
address them at the ML-DNS. The Multi-Layer DNS is precisely where
user domain names (UDNs) are massaged to become IDNs acceptable to
the untouched DNS core.
At 02:33 19/07/2011, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>Apologies if you see this note elsewhere. The ICANN Variant Issues
>Project has previously drawn attention to its activities on this list.
>I wanted to draw people's attention to some definitions that were
>offered to the teams as part of their work. They're available from
>The project is publishing these definitions in an effort to ensure
>they get as wide review as possible. If you wish to make comments, it
>would be ideal if you were to do so on the vip mailing list
>(https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/vip). If that doesn't suit
>your fancy, feel free to send your comments to me and I'll see that
>they get passed along. Please do not use the idna-update mailing list
>for discussion, because I suspect this is off-charter.
>I should note, as a matter of full disclosure, that ICANN has me
>consulting on the vip work.
>ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
>Idna-update mailing list
>Idna-update at alvestrand.no
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Idna-update