[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] Requirements I-D
- To: idn@ops.ietf.org
- Subject: Re: [idn] Requirements I-D
- From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 10:59:54 -0700
- Delivery-date: Mon, 22 May 2000 11:02:15 -0700
- Envelope-to: idn-data@psg.com
At 4:46 AM +0800 5/21/00, James Seng wrote:
>Or perhaps to be a devil advocate, why even bother with canonicalization? Why
>not let the user register X number of times.
Because we would be *forcing* name owners to register *every* logical
combination in order prevent end users from being surprised when
resolving names. It would be a disservice (maybe even a "failure" in
John Klensin's vocabulary) to have an end user get to two different
places if she enters SomeVeryLongName.com or someverylongname.com,
particularly because there is lots of software today that will
convert the former into the latter behind the users' back.
>(I am sure the registry and registrar would love it altho everyone else will
>feel it is a rip-off :-))))
To many of us, Internet users are much more important than name
owners, and name owners are much more important than registries and
their registrars. All the groups must work together, but when there
is a choice of pain allocation to be made, we should minimize the
pain of end users.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium