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 11th April 2010, 09:33 PM
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
Synchronized IDN

What does it mean for a registrant that the domains under synchronized IDN ccTLDs must resolve to the same address or value?

As above, the goal is to ensure an appropriate user experience, not to mandate identical answers to DNS queries at the protocol level.

For a registrant, synchronization means that making a registration of “domainname.syncTLDa” also results in a registration of “domainname.syncTLDb”. The registrant of the domain names, and any variants of these domain names, must be the same. This might be presented by the IDN ccTLD manager as a bundled registration to the registrant.

If a blocked or reserved registration model is preferred then the IDN ccTLDs are not considered synchronized as this will not fulfill the definition of synchronized IDN ccTLDs where the user expectation is that usage of the IDN ccTLDs produces the same result.

The registrant is obligated to keep synchronization at lower levels of the registration. This means that the domains cannot be used for a purpose that is different. This will be apparent in the registration policy between the registry (or registrars/resellers) and the registrant.

http://icann.org/en/topics/idn/fast-....htm#resolving
__________________
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 11th April 2010, 10:26 PM
jacksonm's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,843
iTrader: (26)
Rep Power: 987
jacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished roadjacksonm is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to jacksonm Send a message via Skype™ to jacksonm
Re: Synchronized IDN

I guess these idiots never heard of name-based virtual hosts on Apache webserver...

I have hundreds of domains listening on the same IP address. Apache looks for the domain name which was sent with the http request and sends that request to the documents that I have specified in the configuration file.

In other words, I can do anything I want and they can't stop me. Nor do they have resources to be constantly checking millions of websites per day for identical responses.

People were born with brains, yet they continue to waste time on stuff like this.
__________________
.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 11th April 2010, 11:33 PM
sarcle's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3,717
iTrader: (22)
Rep Power: 1732
sarcle will become famous soon enoughsarcle will become famous soon enoughsarcle will become famous soon enoughsarcle will become famous soon enoughsarcle will become famous soon enoughsarcle will become famous soon enoughsarcle will become famous soon enough
Re: Synchronized IDN

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacksonm View Post
yet they continue to waste time on stuff like this.
Bingo. That is all this is. It's an excuse to stretch this fast track process out and on getting .IDN in the root for an issue they already KNEW about LONG before they started the ccTLD fast track in November.

Everyday I continue to look for the progress for the first four countries sent to IANA on January 21st. What do I read? Well, I think you know the answer.

Who's running the friggin' show here ICANN? Mickey Mouse and Co.?

Early 2010 my ass Tina!
__________________
I can hear the death rattle of fiat from here...
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 12th April 2010, 01:27 AM
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: Synchronized IDN

>The registrant is obligated to keep synchronization at lower levels of the registration.
>This means that the domains cannot be used for a purpose that is different.

Why, exactly?
__________________
It's all jaded style to me.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 12th April 2010, 04:02 AM
sarcle's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 3,717
iTrader: (22)
Rep Power: 1732
sarcle will become famous soon enoughsarcle will become famous soon enoughsarcle will become famous soon enoughsarcle will become famous soon enoughsarcle will become famous soon enoughsarcle will become famous soon enoughsarcle will become famous soon enough
Re: Synchronized IDN

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbert View Post
>The registrant is obligated to keep synchronization at lower levels of the registration.
>This means that the domains cannot be used for a purpose that is different.

Why, exactly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by John C Klensin
Finally, it is a well-established administrative principle that
one should not make requirements that one has no hope of
enforcing.
http://forum.icann.org/lists/sync-id.../msg00004.html

Do we have a dissident amongst Icann?

Quote:
The Fast Track implementation procedure, Resolution 13,
and the proposed Implementation Plan for Synchronized IDN
ccTLDs (referred to simply as "synchronized domains" below)
contain a good deal of confusing or incorrect terminology,
some of which serves to disguise policy issues as technical
ones, but ones that are not actionable (at least consistent
with interoperability and stability) from an implementation
and/or operational standpoint. The ICANN Board has, and
needs to take, ultimate responsibility for taking those
policy decisions, and for expressing them clearly. It must
not use committees, panels, task forces, lengthy and
obscure reports, and very long review processes to avoid or
obscure that responsibility.
Quote:
Resolutions and procedures that try to cloak that goal in
vague, and possibly misleading, terminology about languages and
scripts do not help the community or the applicants and will
probably introduce confusion, confusion that may potentially be
harmful. Part of what might be obscured is the fact that
evaluation of what I describe as a "significant and substantial
need" is entirely a policy matter for which authority and
responsibility rests in the ICANN Board. It is not a technical
matter and cannot be decided on narrow, objective, or technical
criteria. The Board should act like a Board and make the
policy decisions. An attempt, deliberate or not, to treat it
as a technical matter that can be decided upon by panels,
committees, or staff using objective technical criteria is not
ultimately helpful to the Internet community and leads,
inevitably, to criteria that do not quite work and the need for
retuning processes of which Resolution 13 is an unfortunate
example.
http://www.icann.org/en/biog/klensin.htm
__________________
I can hear the death rattle of fiat from here...
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 12th April 2010, 04:55 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: 4514
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: Synchronized IDN

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbert View Post
>The registrant is obligated to keep synchronization at lower levels of the registration.
>This means that the domains cannot be used for a purpose that is different.

Why, exactly?
So Verisign has the rights to do the same with dot com of course!
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 12th April 2010, 03:04 PM
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: Synchronized IDN

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubber Duck View Post
So Verisign has the rights to do the same with dot com of course!
Wow !!!!!!!!

After finally accepting they have no technical solution, they decide to go with the alternate - make everyone eat a pint of "fudge".

So now registries will have to "police" registrants to ensure they don't desychronize.

Never in the history of human bullshit has so much been written for the benefit of so few ..... pass me that fudge, I think I'm going to eat it all and throw up!
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 03:14 PM.

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