On 2 nov 2014, at 17:10, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote:
On Nov 1, 2014, at 8:45 PM, Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> wrote:
Wait a second!
That was one of the most confusing blog posts with the most number of errors I have seen in a while.
I'm in full agreement with Patrik and Andrew here. The article completely confuses "when ICANN allowed IDNs in the root" with "when existing TLDs allowed IDNs in their zones".
And it does definitely not help ICANN.
Right. The article makes it sound like ICANN got to decide when IDNs were used below the root zone, which is both arrogant and factually wrong. Many ccTDLs and gTLDs allowed IDNs as SLDs way before ICANN allowed them as TLDs.
Can this please be resolved ASAP before meetings start in Busan at PP14 on Monday morning? I.e. can ICANN please correct this? For example by withdrawing the post for now, and then posting something that is at least a bit correct?
Yes, please.
There have been some side discussion which have involved not only ICANN but also ISOC and IETF as some sources ICANN did use was at ISOC and IETF, and in that I wrote the following (so you know what I have suggested):
So I would write the most problematic paragraph in the ICANN text as follows:
In 2010, although hostnames since 2003 could use non ASCII the first so called top level domains where added to the root zone in January 2010. This meant that not until 2010 the domain names could not be internationalized for all scripts in the world. It was in 2008 the IETF released a revised version of the IDNA standard that made it possible for ICANN to between 2008 and 2009 develop the process needed for accepting IDN-ccTLDs, and later when the new gTLD process launched all scripts and characters allowed by this standard could be allowed for new gTLDs. We also see in the applied for strings, and already strings live, that this has been a success. Russ Housley, Chairman of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) and former Chairman of IETF, wrote about the IETF IDNA standards process here.
And then link to not the web page on OpenStand but to the remarks he made for ITU.
<http://www.internetsociety.org/sites/default/files/20121119-GSS-Housley-Rema...>
On top of this, the ISOC initiative was due to discussions at ITU PP14 on "what has happened regarding IDN between 2010 and 2014" and the text was also to kill texts and statements that said "nothing has happened since 2010". That is also an important context that is sort of lost. Patrik