[Ext] RE: emoji (was Re: I-D Action: draft-klensin-idna-rfc5891bis-00.txt)

Joseph Yee jyee at afilias.info
Wed Mar 22 06:29:39 CET 2017

>I'm not suggestion "do nothing", however I do see much of the burden being
on the registrar.
And how do registrars check against intent? There are legit business names
& products in spelling words without vowel or swapping characters to
maintain same sound, or appending 'ify' to every verb, or even mixing
script (say MCD promoting BigMäc in Germany).  People will do creative
things to catch attention.

I can't agree to assume emoji would only happen to 'silly' names and won't
creep into serious business.  After all, 🏦of🇺🇸 could be how one access
their bank info in future.

And it's not hard at all to type i❤︎NY (I type this out, even easier on
smart phone), and there are many different hearts in emoji, so I would
argue for unpredictability concern exists on emoji domain name. And if one
insists of pure character (I hope you know what I mean here) form of the
name along to feel safe, then maybe it's not a good idea to enable emoji
from the beginning.


On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele at microsoft.com>

> I'm not suggestion "do nothing", however I do see much of the burden being
> on the registrar.  I don't think the client applications in particular
> should be overly critical.  If the registrar of .gr thinks something is
> useful that the registrar of .ru does not, then I don't think it's the
> browser's place to say that whatever.gr isn't a read domain.
> From the client perspective I think that if the DNS record exists, then we
> should probably use it (with, of course, whatever other checks we want to
> do to ensure that it's safe, which, for us, are also things we do for
> all-ascii names and often the user can override if they disagree with the
> browser warning).
> -Shawn
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John C Klensin [mailto:klensin at jck.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 6:57 PM
> To: Shawn Steele <Shawn.Steele at microsoft.com>; Andrew Sullivan <
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>; Kim Davies <kim.davies at iana.org>
> Cc: Patrik Fältström <paf at frobbit.se>; Mark Svancarek <
> marksv at microsoft.com>; idna-update at alvestrand.no
> Subject: RE: [Ext] RE: emoji (was Re: I-D Action:
> draft-klensin-idna-rfc5891bis-00.txt)
> --On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 01:05 +0000 Shawn Steele <
> Shawn.Steele at microsoft.com> wrote:
> >...
> > IMO, it'd be "nice" if registrars could figure out how to  block those
> >kinds of things, but given the size of the  character repertoire (and
> >font variations) it seems like  there's no perfect solution to the
> >homograph question, even if  you confine it to common "letters".
> There is never going to be a "perfect solution" to any of this.
> If the position one is going to take is "no perfect solution, so let's do
> nothing", I suppose I can understand that, but I can't agree.  Instead, I
> think it is entirely reasonable to try to devise rules to exclude potential
> labels that we know are going to be problematic, especially given the
> idiosyncrasies of the DNS even while knowing that we won't get all of the
> problem cases.
>    john
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20170322/ae6ccb0d/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Idna-update mailing list