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 5th July 2011, 08:43 AM
Clotho's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
iTrader: (20)
Rep Power: 1455
Clotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enough
Top level domain explosion could wreak MAYHEM on NET

Top level domain explosion could wreak MAYHEM on NET

Another sky is falling article, however the comment about AC,IO and TM resolving in certain browser/os combinations struck me as interesting. I tried them out in Vista with a variety of browsers and all failed as expected. Firefox returns a default search page but resolves to the first site in the list if it is a direct match .com so TM resolves to tm.com.my. Can someone try these out with Ubuntu or OSX please? If they work I would be interested in knowing if it is just the browser resolving to the first site in the search results as well.

I don't think it was ever intended that an extension would resolve without anything else added ie. CANNON resolving by itself for example. Has anyone else heard anything about this?

Naturally ICANN will never approve a string that could cause any problems like 1 or ISATAP but the mention that MAIL could cause problems is interesting. I would expect MAIL to be a desirable extension.

In any case none of this FUD has any effect on the transliterations of gTLD's to IDN extensions. They will still be punycode and XN-- is unlikely to conflict with anything.

The comments for the article are amusing as well. People just can't seem to get it through their heads that you can't mix scripts.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 5th July 2011, 09:41 AM
Clotho's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 765
iTrader: (20)
Rep Power: 1455
Clotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enoughClotho will become famous soon enough
Re: Top level domain explosion could wreak MAYHEM on NET

Applicant Guidebook – April 2011 Discussion Draft

2.2.1.2 Reserved Names
All applied-for gTLD strings are compared with the list of
top-level Reserved Names to ensure that the applied-for
gTLD string does not appear on that list.

Top-Level Reserved Names List
AFRINIC IANA-SERVERS NRO
ALAC ICANN RFC-EDITOR
APNIC IESG RIPE
ARIN IETF ROOT-SERVERS
ASO INTERNIC RSSAC
CCNSO INVALID SSAC
EXAMPLE* IRTF TEST*
GAC ISTF TLD
GNSO LACNIC WHOIS
GTLD-SERVERS LOCAL WWW
IAB LOCALHOST
IANA NIC


*Note that in addition to the above strings, ICANN will reserve translations of the terms
“test” and “example” in multiple languages. The remainder of the strings are reserved
only in the form included above.
If an applicant enters a Reserved Name as its applied-for
gTLD string, the application system will recognize the
Reserved Name and will not allow the application to be
submitted.
In addition, applied-for gTLD strings are reviewed during
the String Similarity review to determine whether they are
similar to a Reserved Name. An application for a gTLD
string that is identified as too similar to a Reserved Name
will not pass this review.
Names appearing on the Declared Variants List (see
section 1.3.3) will be posted on ICANN’s website and will be
treated essentially the same as Reserved Names, until such
time as variant management solutions are developed and
variant TLDs are delegated. That is, an application for a
gTLD string that is identical or similar to a string on the
Declared Variants List will not pass this review.
2.2.1.3 DNS Stability Review
This review determines whether an applied-for gTLD string
might cause instability to the DNS. In all cases, this will
involve a review for conformance with technical and other
requirements for gTLD strings (labels). In some exceptional
cases, an extended review may be necessary to
investigate possible technical stability problems with the
applied-for gTLD string.
Note: All applicants should recognize issues surrounding
invalid TLD queries at the root level of the DNS.
Any new TLD registry operator may experience
unanticipated queries, and some TLDs may experience a
non-trivial load of unanticipated queries. For more
information, see the Security and Stability Advisory
Committee (SSAC)’s report on this topic at
http://www.icann.org/en/committees/security/sac045.pdf.
Some publicly available statistics are also available at
http://stats.l.root-servers.org/.
ICANN will take steps to alert applicants of the issues raised
in SAC045, and encourage the applicant to prepare to
minimize the possibility of operational difficulties that would
pose a stability or availability problem for its registrants and
users. However, this notice is merely an advisory to
applicants and is not part of the evaluation, unless the
string raises significant security or stability issues as
described in the following section.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 5th July 2011, 12:25 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: 4507
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: Top level domain explosion could wreak MAYHEM on NET

Twat obviously hasn't read this.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iet...nd-iana-dns-01

Quote:
All numeric TLDs from "0" through "4294967295" ( 2**32 -1 ) are
reserved to avoid conflict with IPv4 integer and dotted quad address
notations. While many standards distinguish readable addresses by
surrounding them with square brackets ("[]"), other widely used
standards such as URIs [RFC 2396] do not provide any syntactic way to
distinguish these.
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 5th July 2011, 12:31 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: 4507
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: Top level domain explosion could wreak MAYHEM on NET

Or indeed this:

http://www.idnforums.com/forums/show...d=1#post183314

Quote:
The rightmost domain label of a fully qualified domain name will never start with a
digit, thus syntactically distinguishing domain names from IPv4 addresses, and may be followed by a single "."
__________________
All offers to sell are void.
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 11:18 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