Re: [idn] Debunking the ACE myth

[David Hopwood <david.hopwood@zetnet.co.uk>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

"Brian W. Spolarich" wrote:
> 
> | My idea is that servers would be upgraded quite quickly,
> | much more quickly than applications.
> 
>   Martin, I suspect you are being extremely over-optimistic on this point.
> :-)
> 
>   I've had discussions with a number of WALID clients who are interested in
> deploying IDN resolution capabilities and have tried other, so-called
> "server-side" approaches.  Those that in particular focus on requiring ISPs
> to make changes have met with limited success in getting them to do so.
> 
>   There is a tremendous amount of inertia in the deployed nameserver
> infrastructure.

If, for example, a proposal required upgrading of the authoritative
servers *for zones that include IDNs* (but not necessarily any other
servers or proxies), I don't see any reason why that couldn't be done
quickly. Such zones have sufficient incentive to upgrade, if necessary.

- -- 
David Hopwood <david.hopwood@zetnet.co.uk>

Home page & PGP public key: http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hopwood/
RSA 2048-bit; fingerprint 71 8E A6 23 0E D3 4C E5  0F 69 8C D4 FA 66 15 01
Nothing in this message is intended to be legally binding. If I revoke a
public key but refuse to specify why, it is because the private key has been
seized under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act; see www.fipr.org/rip


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBO1dbfDkCAxeYt5gVAQHR5Af/dODY6L4QljtcI1uganbBhD9khLdKl/3q
aiyN0lrRHP5SYFnU/7D8tYegyofmJC0iO2ySIRq7VpEcshHauxDl910aWNNGFB5Z
EnziPX5W2QzSE5AI9inmvZazOLTxVADDkVEr2C7JtxnkLzsOiBsQyShEZOKD+9hX
uuNtoKjowBoZYbCEysfJc4hPb2tGdxf4Jw++BntxElBe/phegOyzzXoZ33H88Xwx
B8lhZa0sOURJE9zy7gJHK2UxIGZjXsJAUB5IQrltE7ofCFE7KPX26rbGgLnPohFh
UrURsIgDkFF7T4O2r6H3zi3Wdogklhgy4vX/yGIO/1tuHpc5lyatRQ==
=4XwA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----