I am forwarding this on behalf of Patrik, in the belief that he does not have posting rights directly to this list. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [council] Re: Regarding issues report on IDNs Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 09:35:22 +0100 From: Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com> To: Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> CC: John Klensin <klensin@jck.com>, owner-council@gnso.icann.org, Sophia B <sophiabekele@gmail.com>, Cary Karp <ck@nic.museum>, GNSO Council <council@gnso.icann.org>, Tina Dam <dam@icann.org> I think you have to take a step back and identify what questions have to be asked, and REALLY try to find questions that are not dependent of each other. Many of the words Sophia wrote about DNAME really is not about DNAME but from my point of view other questions. Some example of questions MIGHT be (I don't claim this is enough): - If we have .foo today, what is the process of deciding whether .bar is an ok IDN version of .foo? - If we have .foo today, who can suggest / decide on creation of .bar as an IDN version of .foo? - If we have .foo and .fratz today, and the process decided on via the above questions say that both .foo and .fratz can get .bar as an apropriate version of .foo and .fratz, how is this dispute resolved? - If we have .foo today, and want to create .barbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbarbarb as the IDN version, and some of the characters in the IDN version is either ">63 characters when stored in DNS" or "include characters we think are weird, like space, hyphen-versions etc", what is the process of saying "no" even though the name is sort of ok language wise? Will there be hard pressure to change the IDN standard *AGAIN* because of this technical issue? - If we have .foo today, and create .bar as an IDN version of .foo, should a.foo and a.bar be belong to the same registrant? Etc. paf