££.com

[NitakyCom]

Hello,
I am selling again this super nice rare 2 characters domain!
-------------------
££.com
-------------------
Super nice short finance domain, really rare 2 characters for sale!
All £, ££, £££ are registered in all most extensions, even £££££.com and £££££.net are registered!

Waiting your offers via Sedo one the following page :
https://sedo.com/search/details.php4?domain=xn--9aa.com&tracked=&partnerid=&language=us

Your offer only by Sedo, by PM or email : info@nitaky.com

Welcome :)

[NitakyCom]

already received some contacts and offer ...
A rare nice IDN for sale!
Your offers are always welcome via PM or directly via Sedo page :)

[squirrel]

FYI : http://www.idnforums.com/forums/27334-%C2%A35-com.html

[NitakyCom]

FYI : http://www.idnforums.com/forums/27334-%C2%A35-com.html

Please i think you didn't understand the matter, its impossible from a short time to register any new domain witch contain '£', for exemple if you try to register £125478962548.com its say impossible but who already own any '£' domain can always renew it and use it as he wants, for example www.£.com work always and its redirected to an other domain, £.com is registred till 2018 and i think the owner can use it as he likes without any problem!

for my ££.com, as a test, i just renew it exactly NOW for 1 more new year and it work without any problem, you can try it : www.££.com

Like this, i can tell you that who have such premium "£", for example £.com and my ££.com are really lucky because we will be the only one have such rares domains because simply its impossible to register a new '£' domain but for me i have always my ££.com and it work well and this make my ££.com more important and more rare so more and more value!

[squirrel]

Look, I don't mean to torpedo your sale, but consider the following:

1) IDNA stands for Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications. If the applications can't handle your domain, what's the point ?
2) Your empirical example is misleading. You were able to renew your domain because IDNA2008 has not been implemented yet
3)The transition from IDNA2003 to IDNA2008 is explained here: http://unicode.org/faq/idn.html
IDNA2003 -> UTS #46 -> IDNA2008.
There is absolutely no mention of grandfathering rules or «droit acquis».

;)

[NitakyCom]

Look, I don't mean to torpedo your sale, but consider the following:

1) IDNA stands for Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications. If the applications can't handle your domain, what's the point ?
2) Your empirical example is misleading. You were able to renew your domain because IDNA2008 has not been implemented yet
3)The transition from IDNA2003 to IDNA2008 is explained here: http://unicode.org/faq/idn.html
IDNA2003 -> UTS #46 -> IDNA2008.
There is absolutely no mention of grandfathering rules or «droit acquis».

;)

Please can you show me exactly where they speak about '£', i find that the new rule work more on arabic and hebrew IDNs because i can tell you that there are always problems with IDNs in those 2 languages ... as example the new rules try to help to avoid for example the problem related to four special characters :
------------------------------------------------------------------
U+00DF ( ß ) LATIN SMALL LETTER SHARP S
U+03C2 ( ς ) GREEK SMALL LETTER FINAL SIGMA
U+200C ( ) ZERO WIDTH NON-JOINER
U+200D ( ) ZERO WIDTH JOINER
------------------------------------------------------------------

You said "I don't mean to torpedo your sale" but sorry at the same time you speak about a thing without having any real sources or any real example, i will be happy if you can give me and for others members real reason that proove that my ££.com will not work after and when it will happen?!!!

[squirrel]

This is my source

FYI : http://www.idnforums.com/forums/27334-%C2%A35-com.html

which refers to http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5892.txt

RFC5892 opens with the following words

This document specifies rules for deciding whether a code point,
considered in isolation or in context, is a candidate for inclusion
in an Internationalized Domain Name (IDN).

It is part of the specification of Internationalizing Domain Names in
Applications 2008 ( IDNA2008 ).

If you scroll down, there are several annexes, which, in essence, form a huge table which has virtually all the Unicode 5.2 code points and a mention of their inclusion/exclusion in IDNA

Code point 00A3, which is the pound sign, is part of the disabled block 007B..00B6.

[blastfromthepast]

http://unicode.org/cldr/utility/idna.jsp?a=££.com

[NitakyCom]

I still find your arguments very fair and not built on real points and i still always beleive in my ££.com and happy for it!
All i can say, great thx for your ideas, you are always welcome :)
On an other side, wait & see!

[blastfromthepast]

If you try to sell this, you would be selling a product that you know has been recalled. Not particularly a good business practice.

[NitakyCom]

If you try to sell this, you would be selling a product that you know has been recalled. Not particularly a good business practice.

especially you, i never seen any good answer from you on the forum cos i know always your way of thinking is just to pollute others threads, even before they started to speak about this new rules, you always said bad ideas about my ££.com, this if mean, it mean that you have perhaps always bad ideas or in reality you try always to give bad ideas about others but the truth is that your ideas are the bad!

I am since long time in business and i do only good deal and pro business practice, as i said, you are all wlecome :)

[Drewbert]

££.com will break when the new IDNA standard is adopted by browser manufacturers. It will CEASE TO WORK.

Any domains with symbols in them are WORTHLESS.

It will be interesting to see which registrars kill such domains, and which ones allow them to be renewed even though they are dead - that will speak volumes.

[mulligan]

This is quite painful to watch

[blastfromthepast]

even before they started to speak about this new rules, you always said bad ideas

You are quite wrong. Read the old threads on symbol domains, I was one of the strongest supporters, and it was my request a symbol domain forum category was created on this site. But the technical standard is what it is.

[blastfromthepast]

especially you, i never seen any good answer from you on the forum

Do you own any IDNs besides the £ ones?

[bumblebee man]

This is quite painful to watch

Indeed it is.

Please i think you didn't understand the matter, its impossible from a short time to register any new domain witch contain '£', for exemple if you try to register £125478962548.com its say impossible but who already own any '£' domain can always renew it and use it as he wants, for example www.£.com work always and its redirected to an other domain, £.com is registred till 2018 and i think the owner can use it as he likes without any problem!

for my ££.com, as a test, i just renew it exactly NOW for 1 more new year and it work without any problem, you can try it : www.££.com

Like this, i can tell you that who have such premium "£", for example £.com and my ££.com are really lucky because we will be the only one have such rares domains because simply its impossible to register a new '£' domain but for me i have always my ££.com and it work well and this make my ££.com more important and more rare so more and more value!

:eek:

[Drewbert]

Using the new version of UnicodeChecker for Mac with IDNA version 20908 switched on, we get...

Conversion NOT successful.
Invalid U-Label. 4.2.2. of RFC 5891: U+00A3 is DISALLOWED

The symbol party is over.

I'd already cut up my credit·cards.com and luckily avoided an əɓɐɓʇɹoɯ.com

I'll give ⨀⨀.com a last squeeze before amputation takes place. That's my2¢.com

[blastfromthepast]

əɓɐɓʇɹoɯ.com is IDNA2008 Valid

[Drewbert]

Well, bugger me, you're right.

[Drewbert]

All the Arabic domains with tatweel's (ـ) die.

[blastfromthepast]

All the Arabic domains with tatweel's (ـ) die.

Shhhhhhhhhhhh!!!! Don't tell anyone.

[blackops]

As I understand it, this originally started out as a sale thread,
and for Nitaky's sake lets now attempt to get his thread back
on track...

I think he realises now that finding a buyer for ££.com on here
is hopeless. It is very clear that none of you like symbol-based
domains, you don't "value" them in any way, and probably don't
own any yourselves... and that's absolutely fine :-)

I'm sure Nitaky wishes you all well with your domains, and I don't
think it's unreasonable for him to expect his threads not to be
trashed with incorrect info.

So let me now clarify a few points about symbol-based domains.
This isn't (just) my "opinion" but has now recently been verified
by discussion list members at Ietf.org, Icann and Unicode.

Symbol-based domains, under IDNA 2008, will show an error
message if the resulting web page attempts to resolve.

HOWEVER... and it is a big "however"...

If the symbol-based domain redirects to a different "valid"
name then it won't show the error message, and will simply
redirect people to the redirect name.

So, if Nitaky, for example, with his (keyboard typeable) name
££.com redirected that domain to <whatever.com> then it
will still work under IDNA 2008... just as it does today.

This is what I have been saying throughout, and evidence of
this can be found at:
http://www.idnforums.com/forums/27334-%C2%A35-com.html

If Nitaky owned a dingbats style symbol-based domain, however,
e.g. <heartsymbol>.com, a symbol that can not be typed in on a
keyboard, then he has a decision of whether to allow someone
to see IDNA 2008's "error" message or (as with ££.com) he also
has the option to redirect to another name.

Both of these options are pointless for a dingbats (untypeable)
name, for obvious reasons, but the redirect option makes ££.com
come alive...

A "redirect" is, in fact, necessary anyway for a typeable symbol,
like ££.com, as user's will always need a text-based comparable,
for the symbol domain they have just seen.

Any comments are more than welcome.

[domainguru]

Please show your evidence of this "verified fact" from IETF discussion list etc.

I get the feeling you just don't have a clue how DNS works, but I am happy to be proved wrong. This statement however doesn't give me any confidence:

--------
A "redirect" is, in fact, necessary anyway for a typeable symbol,
like ££.com, as user's will always need a text-based comparable,
for the symbol domain they have just seen.
--------

There is no concept of "necessary" with domains ...... just whether it is a valid domain or not. IETF members don't care what symbol owners think of how it is necessary to treat their domains. They also don't care what is "typeable" or not, just again, what is valid according to their rules across Unicode. Never forget what is "typeable" on one keyboard is not necessarily on another keyboard.

Anyway, evidence please. You have told us you have evidence, please produce. I have read IETF nearly every day for 4 years and I really haven't seen any evidence that disallowed domains will how somehow be "preserved through redirects".... if ££.com is typed into a browser, it will be rejected at that point as an invalid domain, simple as.

[Drewbert]

Sorry, mate, but in order to be redirected in DNS, first the unicode portion of the domain name has to be converted to punycode.

The IDNA 2008 version of the unicode->punycode convertor will refuse to convert ££.com to xn--9aa.com

People running systems that still use the IDNA 2003 punycode convertor will work, but only until they do a software update.

[blackops]

I get the feeling you just don't have a clue how DNS works, but I am happy to be proved wrong. This statement however doesn't give me any confidence:

Please don't insult me DG. I know, from reading some of your other postings, that you get agitated and angry quite easily. I have already explained to the forum your dislike of symbol-based domains, and that is fine, but cut me some slack on your attitude; it really isn't warranted or appreciated.


A "redirect" is, in fact, necessary anyway for a typeable symbol,
like ££.com, as user's will always need a text-based comparable,
for the symbol domain they have just seen.
--------

There is no concept of "necessary" with domains ...... just whether it is a valid domain or not. IETF members don't care what symbol owners think of how it is necessary to treat their domains. They also don't care what is "typeable" or not, just again, what is valid according to their rules across Unicode. Never forget what is "typeable" on one keyboard is not necessarily on another keyboard.

If you read that statement again you will see that I have (obviously) used the word "necessary" in referring to something that needs to be described textually or verbally. In fact, I qualified the word by then going on to explain what I meant, and giving it a context.

Anyway, evidence please. You have told us you have evidence, please produce. I have read IETF nearly every day for 4 years and I really haven't seen any evidence that disallowed domains will how somehow be "preserved through redirects".... if ££.com is typed into a browser, it will be rejected at that point as an invalid domain, simple as.

I didn't say "preserved through redirects", and was misquoted by you on another occasion in your reply too, but that's ok. The evidence I have will be added to this thread as soon as I get back to my home pc, which now may be tomorrow.

Regards,

[blackops]

Ok, here you go:

From: john daw <email removed>
To: <ietf@ietf.org>
Reply-to: email removed
Subject: IDNA 2008 Question Re: "Confusable" Characters In Domain Names
X-RSN: 1/0/933/9556/54165

Dear List Members,

I am a little unclear what impact the IDNA 2008 policy will have on
domain name registrant's who have a domain that does not fall under
the policy's permissible code-points, particularly symbol-based domain
names.

The page http://icann.org/en/topics/idn/fast-track/idna-protocol-2003.txt
clearly explains what codes are permissible, but what in practice, will it
mean if someone types in e.g. €.com in their browser under IDNA 2008?

Will IDNA 2008 not allow the domain registrant to satisfy a user's query
by forwarding them on to a different domain name? I'm curious to know
how such domain names have been disabled, and prevented them from
being shown/resolving.

I will hope to hear any replies on this matter.

Regards,

John Daw

------------------------------------------
First reply from Stephane Bortzmeyer, Network and Systems Architect
for AFNIC. Stephane's technical blog dates back to 1996, and he has
been deeply involved with IETF for the last decade.

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <email removed>
To: john daw <email removed>
Reply-to: email removed
Subject: Re: IDNA 2008 Question Re: "Confusable" Characters In Domain Names
X-RSN: 1/0/933/9556/54166

On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:33:14AM +0100,
john daw <email removed> wrote
a message of 169 lines which said:

> what impact the IDNA 2008 policy will have

It's actually IDNA 2010 since the RFC were all issued this year.

> on domain name registrant's who have a domain that does not fall
> under the policy's permissible code-points, particularly symbol-based
> domain names.

Do note they are probably uncommon, at least at the second-level since
most (probably all) of the TLD never allowed them.

> what in practice, will it mean if someone types in e.g. €.com in their
browser under IDNA 2008?

Browser policy. But typically, users will be presented with an error
message.

> Will IDNA 2008 not allow the domain registrant to satisfy a user's
> query by forwarding them on to a different domain name?

Yes, browsers can (not MUST, CAN) perform mapping from what the user
typed to a legal domain name.

<http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr46/> may be an interesting reading
for you.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

-------------------------------------------------------
Second reply from Andrew Sullivan, Principal of Anvilwalrusden,
an Internet consultancy. Andrew is also an Internet Scientist
at Shinkuro, and DNS Working Group Co-Chair at the IETF.

From: Andrew Sullivan <email removed>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Reply-to: email removed
Subject: Re: IDNA 2008 Question Re: "Confusable" Characters In Domain Names
X-RSN: 1/0/933/9556/54167

On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:33:14AM +0100, john daw wrote:
>
> Dear List Members, I am a little unclear what impact the IDNA 2008
> policy will have on domain name registrant's who have a domain that
> does not fall under the policy's permissible code-points,

Which "the policy" do you mean? IDNA2008 isn't about policy, it's
about protocol. Indeed, the RFCs, if you read them carefully,
explicitly suggest that zone operators (or "registries", but this does
not mean only TLD operators) need to have policies about what
particular code points they will allow. In my view, the right answer
for most cases is a "default closed" with explicit allowance of
particular characters or ranges that you understand.

> particularly symbol-based domain names.The page
> http://icann.org/en/topics/idn/fast-track/idna-protocol-2003.txt clearly
> explains what codes are permissible

That is not the table for IDNA2008. It's for 2003. The basic
approaches in 2008 and 2003 are different. I suggest reading RFC5894
for more background.

> it mean if someone types in e.g. €.com in their browser under IDNA
> 2008? Will IDNA 2008 not allow the domain registrant to satisfy a
> user's queryby forwarding them on to a different domain name?

The euro-currency sign is not a valid character in a U-label, and
therefore that domain is not valid under IDNA2008. Conforming
implementations are not supposed to do a lookup for that domain. It
is possible that such a character would be mapped _prior to_ getting
into the IDNA2008 algorithms. There does not appear to be universal
agreement about how to map these things. In that case in particular,
I don't know what you'd map it to.


> I'm curious to know how such domain names have been disabled,
> and prevented them from being shown/resolving.

The mechanism for this is outlined in the IDNA2008 documents, RFCs
5890, 5891, 5892, and 5893. I suggest reading 5894 too if you want to
understand.

Note that none of this has much to do with your subject line, as
near as I can tell. There is no effort in IDNA2008 to prevent
"confusable" characters in domain names. That's not even a goal
consistent, at the protocol level, with expanding the available
character repertoire, though you could address many issues with good
policy for zone operation.

A


--
Andrew Sullivan
email removed
Shinkuro, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

----------------------------------------------
Third piece of evidence comes from Mark Davis, Co-Founder of
Unicode:

I will not reproduce his email here, as it was made in confidence
(not public) however he confirms all of the above in his personal
website, Macchiato.com.

-------------------------------
Evidence no. 4:

This Unicode web page confirms the above, and from the Unicode
website - http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr46

My apologies if the formatting of this text comes out a bit funny.

Regards,

[bumblebee man]

So this is what you call evidence?

Ok, here you go:

From: john daw <email removed>
To: <ietf@ietf.org>
Reply-to: email removed
Subject: IDNA 2008 Question Re: "Confusable" Characters In Domain Names
X-RSN: 1/0/933/9556/54165
...
Yes, browsers can (not MUST, CAN) perform mapping from what the user
typed to a legal domain name.

[blackops]

So this is what you call evidence?

I do indeed call it evidence "bumblebee man"...

But don't dispair, because in the next few days i'll have some
new evidence to add to it. It's from someone you, and a few
others in this forum, will know quite well...

Saint Trollus, The Patron Saint of Forum Trolls...

He tells me he'll be able to come up with a signed letter saying
everything is cool with symbols, and he has assured me that
the letter will contain all of the main hallmarks of a forum troll
...bitterness, small-mindedness and misinformation, so that
there can be no doubt the letter came from him.

As an aside, he also told me that he is very proud of idnforum
and doesn't believe he's seen many other sites that has over
6000 members, with less than half of one percent making a
regular "contribution" to the site.

He says he's happy that so many members are deterred from
making a comment on the site, and he is sure that's due to all
the negativity, incorrect advice and general bs they can expect
to encounter on the site.

Anyway, do wish me luck with the letter... I hope that will
be able to satisfy you. :p

Regards,

[Drewbert]

Blackops, you're pissing into the wind here.

What you want to prove is that even after browsers and OS's adopt IDNA 2008, you ill be able to redirect previously legal symbol IDN's to a legal domain name.

This won't work.

You seem to think you will be able to do this by setting up a redirect/ Where? At the DNS level or at the web server level?

The thing is, both these levels are too late. The first thing that happens when you enter ££.com into the navigation bar of your browser is a punycode look-up. It HAS to do this before any DNS or HTTP activity occurs because the DNS DOES NOT UNDERSTAND UNICODE CHARACTERS.

So you type in ££.com, the IDNA 2008 compliant browser looks it up in it's unicode table and says "WHOA! THAT'S AN ILLEGAL UNICODE CHARACTER" and that's where it stops.

It stops BEFORE there is ANY chance to do a redirect.

OK?

[blackops]

Blackops, you're pissing into the wind here.

Yeah, you know what Drewbert, I did think somehow I would be "pissing in to the wind".

You obviously haven't read my reply from earlier today...

Seriously, it's no problem. I didn't think you would read it, as it's obvious to anyone reading this thread (and who looks at your previous postings, and those of your best buddies on here) that it's not about the information or facts that you've been presented with at all.

The only thing that matters is that you are *somehow* proven right. I'm afraid that on this occasion, however, the "somehow" will have to be one (or several) of your forum buddies rushing to your aid, and perhaps insulting me in the process... because that's the only way you will feel you've been proven to be correct.

You won't dare to tackle any of the evidence that i've given you earlier today, because the moment you try you will be proven to be wrong!

Let me also pre-empt what I think is coming next, and that is an email from "Alphamale", or whomever, saying i'm banned for offending a forum member. That'd be fine with me, but I would ask that this thread by allowed to continue (with my participation) and after it's done I guarantee that I won't be posting again.

[Drewbert]

You won't dare to tackle any of the evidence that i've given you earlier today, because the moment you try you will be proven to be wrong!


"The euro-currency sign is not a valid character in a U-label, and
therefore that domain is not valid under IDNA2008. Conforming
implementations are not supposed to do a lookup for that domain"

This is the evidence you're basing your case on?

Attorney's #1 rule: Never ask a question that you don't know what the answer will be.

I, for one, don't want you banned. I'm bored and this is entertaining.

[mulligan]

I for 2 don't want to see you banned .. I say ban Drewbert .. :p

[Drewbert]

Duly noted.

[NitakyCom]

Blackops, you're pissing into the wind here.

Personally i find such answer not in the right place, we are here discussing a technical idea and i think it will be great to try to stay on the same friendly wave! on an other side, each time i give my opinion on this forum about any subject, some people add a bad reputation to my account but when some one as you an "admin" say such bad insulte, no one will act!!! shame!

Now, let our friend "blackops" try to explain us what he has as news, he know sure what he talks about, we all here try to learn more and no one is better than the other!


What you want to prove is that even after browsers and OS's adopt IDNA 2008, you ill be able to redirect previously legal symbol IDN's to a legal domain name.

This won't work.

You seem to think you will be able to do this by setting up a redirect/ Where? At the DNS level or at the web server level?

The thing is, both these levels are too late. The first thing that happens when you enter ££.com into the navigation bar of your browser is a punycode look-up. It HAS to do this before any DNS or HTTP activity occurs because the DNS DOES NOT UNDERSTAND UNICODE CHARACTERS.

So you type in ££.com, the IDNA 2008 compliant browser looks it up in it's unicode table and says "WHOA! THAT'S AN ILLEGAL UNICODE CHARACTER" and that's where it stops.

It stops BEFORE there is ANY chance to do a redirect.

OK?

if you see here you are speaking about future and ONLY ICANN people that can explain us real situation in the future because all here we are users and no one will take such decision, so again let our friend "blackops" explain us the result of all what he has discussed with ICANN ...

[bumblebee man]

I do indeed call it evidence "bumblebee man"...

But don't dispair, because in the next few days i'll have some
new evidence to add to it. It's from someone you, and a few
others in this forum, will know quite well...

Saint Trollus, The Patron Saint of Forum Trolls...

He tells me he'll be able to come up with a signed letter saying
everything is cool with symbols, and he has assured me that
the letter will contain all of the main hallmarks of a forum troll
...bitterness, small-mindedness and misinformation, so that
there can be no doubt the letter came from him.

As an aside, he also told me that he is very proud of idnforum
and doesn't believe he's seen many other sites that has over
6000 members, with less than half of one percent making a
regular "contribution" to the site.

He says he's happy that so many members are deterred from
making a comment on the site, and he is sure that's due to all
the negativity, incorrect advice and general bs they can expect
to encounter on the site.

Anyway, do wish me luck with the letter... I hope that will
be able to satisfy you. :p

Regards,

Stop whining, please. I was just asking because the "evidence" you delivered doesn't seem to be prove what you said before. Well, it didn't disprove it either so we know about as much as before.

[mulligan]

IDNA2008 .. the key some to be missing perhaps?

Personally i find such answer not in the right place, we are here discussing a technical idea and i think it will be great to try to stay on the same friendly wave! on an other side, each time i give my opinion on this forum about any subject, some people add a bad reputation to my account but when some one as you an "admin" say such bad insulte, no one will act!!! shame!

Now, let our friend "blackops" try to explain us what he has as news, he know sure what he talks about, we all here try to learn more and no one is better than the other!



if you see here you are speaking about future and ONLY ICANN people that can explain us real situation in the future because all here we are users and no one will take such decision, so again let our friend "blackops" explain us the result of all what he has discussed with ICANN ...

[Drewbert]

if you see here you are speaking about future and ONLY ICANN people that can explain us real situation in the future because all here we are users and no one will take such decision, so again let our friend "blackops" explain us the result of all what he has discussed with ICANN ...

Not ICANN. IETF.

IETF outcomes are far more certain than ICANN outcomes. If he's asking ICANN he's barking up the wrong tree.

Read the RFC's.

[domainguru]

I'm sorry Mr BlackOps, its not me getting emotional. You have said I hate symbol domains or whatever, I don't. I have a hard job getting emotional about any kind of domains. And I'm certainly not going to start with domains that aren't even valid any more.

I simply am here pointing out that symbol domains won't get past the browser stage of resolution. How can you redirect them if they never get to nameserver look-up stage? They never see the DNS system. The browser will reject them. They aren't valid domains. How hard is this to understand???

[domainguru]

Personally i find such answer not in the right place, we are here discussing a technical idea and i think it will be great to try to stay on the same friendly wave! on an other side, each time i give my opinion on this forum about any subject, some people add a bad reputation to my account but when some one as you an "admin" say such bad insulte, no one will act!!! shame!

Now, let our friend "blackops" try to explain us what he has as news, he know sure what he talks about, we all here try to learn more and no one is better than the other!



if you see here you are speaking about future and ONLY ICANN people that can explain us real situation in the future because all here we are users and no one will take such decision, so again let our friend "blackops" explain us the result of all what he has discussed with ICANN ...

1) BlackOps hasn't discussed shit with anyone, least of all ICANN.

2) ICANN don't make the decisions on which IDNs are valid. That is clearly IETF's job.

Like I've said, I've read IETF mailing list nearly every day for 4 years now. It was clear all along that symbol domains were for the chop. The standard is finalized. They have been chopped.

Delete $$££.com and move on. And if that is all you have, you should have been listening more closely to the repeated messages on this forum that symbol domains (amongst others) would eventually be useless.

I know the IDN talk in the main domaining community has been about symbol domains because that is all most ASCII domainers could comprehend, but honestly, that was never what IDNs were about.

[NitakyCom]

Not ICANN. IETF.

IETF outcomes are far more certain than ICANN outcomes. If he's asking ICANN he's barking up the wrong tree.

Read the RFC's.

Yes yes that what i mean with "ICANN ...", i mean ICANN. IETF and his all contacts, i just find the way some members here discuss the subject not friendly!!!

Our friend "blackops" have an idea and we have to listen to him NOT INSULTING HIM any way!!!

If some one can answer him technically, he is welcome, if not, he can go doing and other thing better than to come here insulting people!!!!

BACK to our technical subject!

[domainguru]

Yes yes that what i mean with "ICANN ...", i mean ICANN. IETF and his all contacts, i just find the way some members here discuss the subject not friendly!!!

Our friend "blackops" have an idea and we have to listen to him NOT INSULTING HIM any way!!!

If some one can answer him technically, he is welcome, if not, he can go doing and other thing better than to come here insulting people!!!!

BACK to our technical subject!

lol. "IETF" is not a person ...........

We have answered him technically, for many years now. Subject over, and out.

[blackops]

Hey guys, I just want to wish all of you the very best
for the future. I won't be replying after this message.

Yes, of course, there is something very wrong here and
we have great differences of opinion on this, and I suspect
many other areas of "domaining".

I genuinely don't want you to spend any more time on this
thread, as I certainly won't.

...and I won't be checking on it again, and won't be signing
up under a different name (you'd know it was me anyway!).

:-)

As I say, good luck with your domains, good luck for the
future. Over and out.

[blastfromthepast]

there is something very wrong here

Indeed.

[NitakyCom]

lol. "IETF" is not a person ...........


Who told you IETF is a person!!!! You are really funny, how age you have please?!!! before i am a domainer, am also engineer and i feel its hard to see some people OUT speaking about technical subject so they just answer like you do!

as "blackops" said, some people here are really ...... !!!!

Good luck for the good members here and i hope good learning for the others!

[Drewbert]

Our friend "blackops" have an idea and we have to listen to him NOT INSULTING HIM any way!!!

If some one can answer him technically, he is welcome, if not, he can go doing and other thing better than to come here insulting people!!!!


The technical answer I provided was:

"Sorry, mate, but in order to be redirected in DNS, first the unicode portion of the domain name has to be converted to punycode.

The IDNA 2008 version of the unicode->punycode convertor will refuse to convert ££.com to xn--9aa.com

People running systems that still use the IDNA 2003 punycode convertor will work, but only until they do a software update."

He chose to ignore that and even went as far providing "evidence" that proved the above.

Once he does that, all bets are off, it's insult time.

[NitakyCom]

The technical answer I provided was:

"Sorry, mate, but in order to be redirected in DNS, first the unicode portion of the domain name has to be converted to punycode.

The IDNA 2008 version of the unicode->punycode convertor will refuse to convert ££.com to xn--9aa.com


Here as i said before you are speaking about future and ONLY IETF who will say if it will work or no and our friend "blackops" was working to provide us more evidence to prove his idea so why don't give him time, or you feel your self the ONLY one who know ALL, i think the best is to listen other and sorry, because you speak here about future, you can't be sure and if answer will be from IETF, it will sure!


Once he does that, all bets are off, it's insult time.

Don't forget that this is a forum and i think insult haven't place here!!!

Again, if it was me who insulted someone, i am sure you will BAN me because you are an "Admin" but because its you, no one will act, on an other side, don't forget that if you are an "Admin", this mean that you must be more friendly and never insult any more, but what i say to you, good lcuk with your insulting game, i am sorry, shame! i don't like such discuss!

If we speak about technical, the situation is new for both me, him, you and all other and there is no one who is sure about how it will work in the future, so i find our friend "blackops" logic when he contacted IETF to bring for us the right answer!

[Drewbert]

Holy crap how many time do I have to say this.

He was saying you could redirect the banned domain to a legal domain.

I said in order to do a redirect you have to make a query to the DNS. To do that you FIRST have to convert the UNICODE IDN into an ASCII domain for the DNS to work.

HOW THE FUCK can you do that with a UNICODE IDN that includes ILLEGAL CHARACTERS?

YOU CAN'T.

IF SOMEONE NEEDS THIS INFORMATION PUNCHED INTO THEM BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY"RE A FUCKING COMPUTER, JUST LET ME KNOW.

Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

[NitakyCom]

Holy crap how many time do I have to say this.

He was saying you could redirect the banned domain to a legal domain.

I said in order to do a redirect you have to make a query to the DNS. To do that you FIRST have to convert the UNICODE IDN into an ASCII domain for the DNS to work.

HOW THE FUCK can you do that with a UNICODE IDN that includes ILLEGAL CHARACTERS?

YOU CAN'T.

IF SOMEONE NEEDS THIS INFORMATION PUNCHED INTO THEM BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY"RE A FUCKING COMPUTER, JUST LET ME KNOW.

Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

Its no problem when you speak about technic but please all i say is that you avoid to insult other, we can always speak friendly, that all what i have, good luck!

[Drewbert]

If you speak about something technical and get it wrong and you're a noob then that's fine.

If you do so, and people respond with FACTS to correct you, and then you (or another noob) keep making the same technical error in the same thread, then we start wasting our time repeating ourselves and we start getting pissed.

Please for people to stop the insults after someone has proven ignorance REPEATEDLY and refuse to accept their wrong is just asking a little too much.

"Better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt" as my mother would often say - and still does, in fact.

[blastfromthepast]

I don't buy it. He's faking ignorance in order to have a basis on which to sell his domains in another venue.

[NitakyCom]

I don't buy it. He's faking ignorance in order to have a basis on which to sell his domains in another venue.

is there any one here asked you to buy?!!!! can you stop your faking stupid comments, i always asked what you have in your mind, try to learn more in life, there are always good stations to take! arf!!!

[blastfromthepast]

i always asked what you have in your mind, try to learn more in life!

Yeah, I have in mind that you are pretending to be a simple, ignorant, understand-nothing guy. Whereas in reality you, as you say, are an engineer. Even the most simple minded engineer would understand that "INVALID" means "will not work."

No need to start getting emotional as a smokescreen either. Stop the nonsense, you're not fooling anyone.

[NitakyCom]

Yeah, I have in mind that you are pretending to be a simple, ignorant, understand-nothing guy. Whereas in reality you, as you say, are an engineer. Even the most simple minded engineer would understand that "INVALID" means "will not work."

No need to start getting emotional as a smokescreen either. Stop the nonsense, you're not fooling anyone.

Wow! hihihihihihi :eek: what kind of poor nothing big zero you are! :lol:

[blastfromthepast]

Wow! hihihihihihi :eek: what kind of poor nothing big zero you are! :lol:

Look, I gave you a complement on you on your skills of deception, and you still come out a rude jerk. Got issues?

[NitakyCom]

Look, I gave you a complement on you on your skills of deception, and you still come out a rude jerk. Got issues?

really i don't care! what you say is nothing for me especially YOU, i always said welcome for coments but your coments are always like .... so just keep your ideas for you, i know what to do and i will never need your ideas, just because you and your idea is nothing, "Matkassarlich rassi hambouk" i haven't time for you!

Thx for all serious ideas, i always said you are welcome and no one will sell a domain witch will be INVALID but till now, each one of you speak about future, so i will wait & see, future is future and i will sure renew my domain till he died ;) perhaps i will died before it :p

[blastfromthepast]

Do you know me personally? I don't think so. So what is this "especially you" part all about?

[alpha]

don't forget that if you are an "Admin", this mean that you must be more friendly and never insult any more

I think you are mixing Drew up with someone else.

[blastfromthepast]

just because you and your idea is nothing, "Matkassarlich rassi hambouk"

Nitaky, sbazko byusba.

[NitakyCom]

Nitaky, sbazko byusba.

:eek: You see again you insult, you are really a poor toilet (sbazko byusba), you can't say a good word because your are you a bad nothing big zero so you have only bad word in your dictionay and this mean really that you are OUT of life, poor one!

About my "Matkassarlich rassi hambouk", it wasn't an insult, it mean "let me quiet, GOD bless your father" so you see there is really a big difference between me and you, i am really happy because i respect other and i dont use insult but you, you are really no thing, if you want now, GO TO FIRE!

[domainguru]

Who told you IETF is a person!!!! You are really funny, how age you have please?!!! before i am a domainer, am also engineer and i feel its hard to see some people OUT speaking about technical subject so they just answer like you do!

as "blackops" said, some people here are really ...... !!!!

Good luck for the good members here and i hope good learning for the others!

Presumably you worked in sector 7G in a nuclear power plant?

btw, owning an INVALID IDN domain doesn't make you a domainer .....

[blastfromthepast]

you have only bad word in your dictionay

:D

[blastfromthepast]

GO TO FIRE!

Sorry, I've got ticket somewhere else.

[bwhhisc]

MODERATORS NOTE
To all participants:

Stay on topic, stop the insults or this thread will be closed.

[blastfromthepast]

He simply misunderstood my Molvanian.

[bwhhisc]

He simply misunderstood my Molvanian.

I am just responding to members pm requests that we maintain the Molvanian standard of etiquette here. ;)

[blastfromthepast]

http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/8068/picture369.png

[NitakyCom]

He simply misunderstood my Molvanian.

Hey, i have a friend who speak Molvanian and he confirmed to me that it was a big insult so why you lies here, what kind of poor person you are!!!

Can you tell us that you are "sbazko byusba" because you see its not an insult ... really i am asking from where you come!

Ok, then i dont need to hear from poor people as you, poor liar!!!!

[bwhhisc]

This discussion is going nowhere, all valid points have been made.


THREAD REOPENED AT MEMBERS REQUEST IN LIGHT OF TODAY'S NEWS....please stay on topic and no personal attacks.

[alpha]

bumpity bump

[blastfromthepast]

What is interesting is they are going to delete these domains.

[basel]

Lol