IDN Forums - Internationalized Domain Names  
Home | Advertise on idnforums | Premium Membership

Go Back   IDN Forums - Internationalized Domain Names > IDN Discussions > General Discussion

General Discussion Feel free to talk about anything and everything in this board.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 2nd June 2009, 12:46 AM
555 555 is offline
ком.ком コム.コム
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,141
iTrader: (33)
Rep Power: 1685
555 has disabled reputation
No Dname

Variant Strings Management.

Comments have been received stating that the Guidebook is not specific enough about how variant strings should be managed.
ICANN has been in the process of analyzing the possibility of allocation of variant strings. ICANN understands the need for implementation of such strings, due to the cultural, linguistic and sometimes software/hardware nature of the way identifiers are entered into various applications. Making sure that the identifier entered into an application is exactly the identifier (for example a web address) that the users intended to enter or access is an increasingly difficult task with the introduction of IDNs. The reason being that several characters in Unicode, although considered the same, will have different codepoints and also can be entered in various ways.
In order to ensure that user confusion is limited as much as possible there is only one reasonable way of introducing variant TLDs in the root zone, and that is by ensuring an aliasing functionality.
Initially there was a belief that the DNAME resource record would enable such aliasing functionality in the root zone, however due to extensive testing, this has been determined not to be possible.
All variant TLDs (as identified by the language tables furnished by the gTLD registry) will be blocked for registration. ICANN encourages the community to initiate review of DNAME and/or development of a technical stable solution that would make aliasing functionality in the root zone possible. When such a solution is in place, the development of an allocation process can be revisited.

A lot of additional info http://www.icann.com/en/topics/new-g...31may09-en.pdf
__________________
ロレックス.com رولكس.com Ролекс.com Порше.com 路易威登.com 必胜宅急送.com 香港迪士尼乐园.com Hermès.com Nestlé.com
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 2nd June 2009, 02:30 AM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 7,864
iTrader: (60)
Rep Power: 2205
bwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enoughbwhhisc will become famous soon enough
Re: No Dname

QUOTE: Initially there was a belief that the DNAME resource record would enable such aliasing functionality in the root zone, however due to extensive testing, this has been determined not to be possible. END QUOTE Just my 2 cents, in the last 3-4 years, I don't remember any tests that came to that end all conclusion.

On another note...looks like they are moving in the right direction on with the 3 character Chinese/Japanese/Korean issue...
II. Summary of Comments
String Requirements for IDN TLDs. It is surprising and disappointing that the second version is still saying that for IDN gTLDs it has to be 3 characters or longer; the justification for this is weak. For example, regarding the possible confusion with ccTLDs, doesn’t the string confusion test for gTLDs already address that issue? E. Chung, GNSO Transcript at 84 (28 Feb. 2009).
ICANN is still too Anglo‐centric. The revised guidebook rule to go from three ASCII characters to three Unicode characters does not work for all languages. Also, the new gTLD RFP is totally silent on the JET guideline on IDN variants. These issues need further consideration. J. Seng, Public Forum Transcript at 3‐4 (5 Mar. 2009); D. Allen (Module 2, 13 April 2009); E. Brunner‐Williams (Module 2, 14 April 2009).
The requirement for a minimum of three characters in the script does not work for Korean scripts because one or two Korean syllables can represent a meaningful word; similar concerns exist for China and Japan. A string computing algorithm is effective for assessing the degree of visual similarity. It is a big mistake if ICANN treats the ASCII TLD and IDN TLD with the same measuring stick. ICANN needs to take this issue very seriously; without single and two character URLs on the top level, introduction of IDN gTLD will be meaningless for Korean Internet users. Possible way forward is a consistent exception for some scripts such as Korean, Chinese, and Japanese. J. Kim, Public Forum Transcript at 5‐6 (5 Mar. 2009).
ICANN needs to consider and pay more attention to the problems about the “three character limitation” in relation to the Chinese language for the next version of guidebook. CONAC (13 April 2009). ICANN should follow the GNSO principle recommendations and lift the restriction on the length of an IDN TLD (i.e. more than two characters) or modify the clause to make it become script specific. Without change the restriction would be a significant deterrent for Chinese TLDs because most meaningful Chinese words are composed only by 2 Chinese characters. CNNIC (13 April 2009); R. Chen (Module 2, 13 April 2009).
Recommendation: If a majority of the Unicode characters of the writing system for a particular language possess a meaning on their own, then the restriction of 3 or more characters should not be applied. The applicant should specify the classification of the writing systems of the 207
Analysis of Public Comment of the New gTLD Application Guidebook Version 2
May 2009
string they are applying for, namely Logographic, Syllabic, Alphabetic, Abugida, Abjad and Featural. The rule should apply on a per‐string basis and not based on the language (e.g., Japanese hiragana string may still be restricted to 3 or more characters whereas a Japanese kanji string may be allowed on its own). J. Seng (13 April 2009).
Recommendation: The 3 character requirement should be lifted from strings whose writing system employ basic building blocks that have generally accepted semantic associations, where single and two‐character sequences represent concepts in their own right without the need for abbreviation. These systems do not remotely resemble Latin so visual confusability will not be an issue (there’s string review for that). The character repertoire for these scripts is orders of magnitude larger than that of alphabetic or syllabic scripts (e.g., 71,442 Han characters in Unicode version 3.2 versus 26 English alphabets). W. Tan (13 April 2009).
The current guidebook should categorically state that in general one or more character IDN TLDs will be allowed “with some possible restrictions that are being discussed”. NCUC (13 April 2009); DotAfrica (Module 2, 12 April 2009); S. Subbiah (Module 2, 13 April 2009).
An exception should be allowed for Chinese, Japanese and Korean scripts to the 3 or more characters string requirement (2.1.1.3.2). RyC (Modules 1‐4, 13 April 2009).

Last edited by bwhhisc; 2nd June 2009 at 02:55 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 2nd June 2009, 04:56 AM
Rubber Duck's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Czech Republic (For those of you from USA = Chechnya)
Posts: 15,929
iTrader: (59)
Rep Power: 4513
Rubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura about
Re: No Dname

I believe there were issues with the DNAME instruction set, but I think they have been working on these (they not being ICANN). There were certainly issues with a lot of legacy (junk) hardware that could not run the DNAME instruction. Most of those were in the US.

It may well be that DNAME is run outside the root by individual registries. Such a solution is not necessarily technically inferior, but it will mean that only the likes of Verisign and a handful of ccTLD operators will do it.
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 2nd June 2009, 05:20 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,699
iTrader: (50)
Rep Power: 1251
gammascalper is on a distinguished roadgammascalper is on a distinguished roadgammascalper is on a distinguished roadgammascalper is on a distinguished roadgammascalper is on a distinguished roadgammascalper is on a distinguished road
Re: No Dname

IIRC JPRS had a result set in a presentation that indicated that for ccTLD at least, DNAME was a viable solution for single language to single TLD. Can't remember where I saw that.
__________________
-----
Offers by e-mail, PM or forum post valid for 5 days
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 2nd June 2009, 05:28 PM
Rubber Duck's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Czech Republic (For those of you from USA = Chechnya)
Posts: 15,929
iTrader: (59)
Rep Power: 4513
Rubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura about
Re: No Dname

Quote:
Originally Posted by gammascalper View Post
IIRC JPRS had a result set in a presentation that indicated that for ccTLD at least, DNAME was a viable solution for single language to single TLD. Can't remember where I saw that.
Yes, they concluded it was 100% viable, but I don't think they were talking about running it in the ICANN Root. DNAMES could be run on their own resolvers.
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 3rd June 2009, 01:35 AM
555 555 is offline
ком.ком コム.コム
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,141
iTrader: (33)
Rep Power: 1685
555 has disabled reputation
Re: No Dname

More here: http://www.icann.com/en/topics/idn/f...29may09-en.pdf

The resource record DNAME was originally expected to enable the aliasing functionality in the root zone, as DNAME is being used for this purpose at the second level under various TLDs, however, analysis to date shows that DNAME does not function at the root level. The proposal made by ICANN in the previous version of this paper (as mentioned above) was to delegate the variant strings separately and then require that the TLD manager ensures duplication of the multiple zones. However, the technical complication with this proposal is that while a registry manager can duplicate zone immediately under a TLD, this will not function at lower levels. This would put a requirement upon the registrants (and their sub-domains) to duplicate zone contents at lower levels as well. There is no mechanism to ensuring that this takes place. Unless a technically sound solution is demonstrated to successfully demonstrate aliasing or duplication functionality the variant strings cannot be allocated at this time.
__________________
ロレックス.com رولكس.com Ролекс.com Порше.com 路易威登.com 必胜宅急送.com 香港迪士尼乐园.com Hermès.com Nestlé.com
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 3rd June 2009, 01:44 AM
555 555 is offline
ком.ком コム.コム
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,141
iTrader: (33)
Rep Power: 1685
555 has disabled reputation
Re: No Dname

Also from same above source:

Previously ICANN proposed that variant strings could be either allocated or reserved for registration. In order to be allocated it was proposed that the string (i) fulfilled all the string requirements in the Fast Track Process and (ii) that while the strings was inserted as a separate delegation in the root, they needed to be treated as aliased in order to avoid confusion. All other variant staring was proposed to be blocked for allocated as they otherwise would introduce a confusable situation for users.
For the purpose of this paper, aliasing means that, say there are two variant string “.variant” and “.variànt. Under aliasing, if a registrant registers ‘example.variant’ then ‘example.variànt’ would also resolve to the same address, i.e. the two TLDs are considered the same or replaceable.

And

ICANN understands the need expressed in the community for enabling allocation of variant strings, in particular for locations where some users will key in one string and other users will key in the variant string when accessing for example a website. ICANN urges the community to continue to discuss and develop a technical solution that will enable the allocation of variant strings in the root zone in a stable manner. Until then IDN ccTLD Fast Track requesters will need to select one string per script or language only or alternatively wait until a technical solution has been found.
In order to reserve the possibility of allocating variant strings to the appropriate entities, ICANN will ensure that all variant strings are reserved or blocked for allocation for now.
Blocked strings will be considered as “existing strings” when incoming requests are checked for conflicts with existing TLDs. Therefore, any later request for the same string will be denied.
As mentioned in the beginning of this paper, ICANN is actively soliciting comments on this important subject. This feedback will play a key role in shaping final implementation plans, intended for presentation at the ICANN meeting in Sydney (June 2009).
__________________
ロレックス.com رولكس.com Ролекс.com Порше.com 路易威登.com 必胜宅急送.com 香港迪士尼乐园.com Hermès.com Nestlé.com
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 3rd June 2009, 02:28 AM
domainguru's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,835
iTrader: (14)
Rep Power: 2520
domainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura aboutdomainguru has a spectacular aura about
Re: No Dname

Quote:
Originally Posted by 261275 View Post
Also from same above source:

Previously ICANN proposed that variant strings could be either allocated or reserved for registration. In order to be allocated it was proposed that the string (i) fulfilled all the string requirements in the Fast Track Process and (ii) that while the strings was inserted as a separate delegation in the root, they needed to be treated as aliased in order to avoid confusion. All other variant staring was proposed to be blocked for allocated as they otherwise would introduce a confusable situation for users.
For the purpose of this paper, aliasing means that, say there are two variant string “.variant” and “.variànt. Under aliasing, if a registrant registers ‘example.variant’ then ‘example.variànt’ would also resolve to the same address, i.e. the two TLDs are considered the same or replaceable.

And

ICANN understands the need expressed in the community for enabling allocation of variant strings, in particular for locations where some users will key in one string and other users will key in the variant string when accessing for example a website. ICANN urges the community to continue to discuss and develop a technical solution that will enable the allocation of variant strings in the root zone in a stable manner. Until then IDN ccTLD Fast Track requesters will need to select one string per script or language only or alternatively wait until a technical solution has been found.
In order to reserve the possibility of allocating variant strings to the appropriate entities, ICANN will ensure that all variant strings are reserved or blocked for allocation for now.
Blocked strings will be considered as “existing strings” when incoming requests are checked for conflicts with existing TLDs. Therefore, any later request for the same string will be denied.
As mentioned in the beginning of this paper, ICANN is actively soliciting comments on this important subject. This feedback will play a key role in shaping final implementation plans, intended for presentation at the ICANN meeting in Sydney (June 2009).
In other words, back to square one. So much for fast-track of any kind ....
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 3rd June 2009, 02:48 AM
phio's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Arctic Circle
Posts: 1,541
iTrader: (31)
Rep Power: 675
phio is an unknown quantity at this pointphio is an unknown quantity at this pointphio is an unknown quantity at this pointphio is an unknown quantity at this pointphio is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: No Dname

Quote:
Originally Posted by domainguru View Post
In other words, back to square one. So much for fast-track of any kind ....
Which languages are affected the most by variants?
__________________
.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 3rd June 2009, 05:07 AM
Rubber Duck's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Czech Republic (For those of you from USA = Chechnya)
Posts: 15,929
iTrader: (59)
Rep Power: 4513
Rubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura about
Re: No Dname

Thank-you ICANN't.
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 3rd June 2009, 05:12 AM
Rubber Duck's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Czech Republic (For those of you from USA = Chechnya)
Posts: 15,929
iTrader: (59)
Rep Power: 4513
Rubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura about
Re: No Dname

Well, clearly dot RF and other cyrillic script domains will go ahead as planned.

It looks like IDN.cn and IDN.com will be the main candidates for China with Japan going for .co.jp and .com.

India will be comfortable with .com.

As for the Arabs, well you can expect more plans flying into to tall buildings I guess.
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 3rd June 2009, 06:37 AM
Explorer's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 761
iTrader: (13)
Rep Power: 595
Explorer is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: No Dname

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubber Duck View Post
Well, clearly dot RF and other cyrillic script domains will go ahead as planned.
Am I reading this correctly? Sounds like IDN.com will not turn into IDN.ком for a long long time while IDN.рф is a full speed ahead?
__________________
Asking a local domainer who missed the boat on IDNs in his language if IDNs are valuable is like asking your wife whether your mistress is pretty.

Last edited by Explorer; 3rd June 2009 at 06:43 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 3rd June 2009, 06:57 AM
Rubber Duck's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Czech Republic (For those of you from USA = Chechnya)
Posts: 15,929
iTrader: (59)
Rep Power: 4513
Rubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura about
Re: No Dname

Quote:
Originally Posted by Explorer View Post
Am I reading this correctly? Sounds like IDN.com will not turn into IDN.ком for a long long time while IDN.рф is a full speed ahead?
The proposals relates specifically to Fast Track, so there is no suggestion that .ком would be blocked, although it does indicate there is not going to be dot .kom aliasing in the immediate future.

It would seem to me that problem with DNAME functionality relates to Sub-Domains. What they are effectively saying is that Registeries have no contol over the allocation of sub-domains. Individual registrants have control over where these are directed, so it therefore becomes impossible to manage or control.
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 3rd June 2009, 07:12 AM
jose's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,720
iTrader: (49)
Rep Power: 5421
jose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nicejose is just really nice
Re: No Dname

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubber Duck View Post
It would seem to me that problem with DNAME functionality relates to Sub-Domains. What they are effectively saying is that Registeries have no contol over the allocation of sub-domains. Individual registrants have control over where these are directed, so it therefore becomes impossible to manage or control.
Bullshit. Even I can draw a solution for that. There's ALWAYS a solution with current technology. It's just a mater of money/time and willing to do so.
__________________
Looking for the perfect, still free .com domain name, for your next endeavor? Ask me. $5 only. Here's my most recent, 101th story of success: CarRealtime.com
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 3rd June 2009, 04:25 PM
Rubber Duck's Avatar
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Czech Republic (For those of you from USA = Chechnya)
Posts: 15,929
iTrader: (59)
Rep Power: 4513
Rubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura aboutRubber Duck has a spectacular aura about
Re: No Dname

Quote:
Originally Posted by jose View Post
Bullshit. Even I can draw a solution for that. There's ALWAYS a solution with current technology. It's just a mater of money/time and willing to do so.
No, it is more down to politics.

If I own a domain and sell you a Sub-Domain, but I also sell the Variant of that Sub-Domain to Michael, then how the hell is DNAMES going to resolve the issue, even if the technology can do everything you could wish of it?
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 3rd June 2009, 04:40 PM
Drewbert's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,091
iTrader: (20)
Rep Power: 0
Drewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgyDrewbert is a tad dodgy
Re: No Dname

This is the way I read it:

1. Versign will produce a list of the string it considers to be variants for .com in other languages, .ком being one of those variants. All other current gTLD operators will do so for their existing gTLD's.

2. ICANN will take that big long list, and make them all "reserved" TLD's, tagged to those gTLD operators, but not placed in the root.

3. "Aliasing" or whatever of those reserved IDN TLD's will be sorted out at a later date. Although the aliasing in the DNS is a fairly simple matter, it also has to be propagated through the separate registry/registrar system - a current example of this is .biz where they automatically allocate simplified and trad chinese to registrants, but the registrars systems have no way of letting those registrants gain access. Registrar will have to update their systems to handle it. Also, people will have to do the aliasing MANUALLY on their own equipment - such as adding the aliased IDN domain to their web server/email server config files etc.

It might end up being easier for the gTLD's to treat the extra IDN gTLD's they get as completely separate registration databases (if ICANN will allow that), and mirror THAT database instead so if you have мими.com, you get a completely new entry мими.ком and you can assign it to different IP numbers and - if you want - sell it separately (and likely you would have to pay a seperate reg charge for it). The other option they may do is offer you the chance to exchange мими.com for мими.ком, then they do whatever they want with the former.
__________________
It's all jaded style to me.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 3rd June 2009, 05:26 PM
Semi-retired
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Blighty
Posts: 5,531
iTrader: (57)
Rep Power: 3445
alpha has disabled reputation
Re: No Dname

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbert View Post
It might end up being easier for the gTLD's to treat the extra IDN gTLD's they get as completely separate registration databases (if ICANN will allow that), and mirror THAT database instead so if you have мими.com, you get a completely new entry мими.ком and you can assign it to different IP numbers and - if you want - sell it separately (and likely you would have to pay a seperate reg charge for it). The other option they may do is offer you the chance to exchange мими.com for мими.ком, then they do whatever they want with the former.
yeah I agree with this; I think everyone is looking at everyone else waiting for a precedent to be set.

Looking at the latest developments on the .JP front...

Up until recently the message seemed clear from JPRS, that:
a) they will introduce .日本 and it will be related to .jp
b) .日本 and .jp will be aliased
c) existing registrant of idn .jp will automatically get idn .日本

but then a few days ago, this came out from the Japanese Government:
http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/000019778.pdf

the highlights are:

a) they want to introduce .日本
b) but they believe that forcing the alias of existing .jp to .日本 will be confusing. (actually I think it will be more confusing for the end user this way, but you can read about this later on my blog )
c) existing registrant of idn.jp will be entitled to .日本

So, it seems that there is disagreement between the Japanese Govt and JPRS as to whether .日本 and .jp will be aliased - technical limitations were never mentioned - only political.

What matters though, is that everyone is agreeing that the current registrant rights of idn .jp should be protected; so whether the idn .日本 ends up being a virtual alias of .jp, or whether .日本 ends up being a seperate namespace - I guess matters very little; aside from the $ factor of maybe having to pay again for .日本 registrations.

precedent set.

Last edited by alpha; 3rd June 2009 at 05:31 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 4th June 2009, 03:32 AM
sbe18's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,337
iTrader: (10)
Rep Power: 1646
sbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enoughsbe18 will become famous soon enough
Re: No Dname

my limited take:

it is not no DNAME....it is no DNAME/aliasing in the root server itself.

It lets Verisign and root server hosts, put some type of aliasing somewhere but not in the root server.

fine....

I believe that Verisign is going to go with one IDN string per language for dot com and dot net. And that will be it. ICANN punted it to Verisign's monopoly with a separate table...aliasing/dname or whatever it will be called.

And I agree that the the RTL languages are screwed for the moment...
maybe the 1 per 1 string will be in the browser for Hebrew, Arabic, Urdu and Farsi...? or a cntl/alt/shift hotkey to put cctld or gtld in the hard right of the location bar after the send key is hit....

s/
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 11:20 AM.

Site Sponsors
Your ad here
buy t-shirt
מחיר הזהב

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0
Copyright idnforums.com 2005

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54