Re: [idn] Intro to my I-D

[Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>]

Ben,

The example offered by Deng, which should cause you less of a headache
than French-Indian.

For example:

Deng registers a Simplified Chinese domain name: XYZ.cn. (ip addr 1.2.3.1)

	Assume Simplified characters X, Y, and Z, each have just one
	Traditional form, characters U, V and W, respectively.

	The names formed from the union of these three equivalence classes
	are:
		XYZ, XYW, XVZ, XVW, UYZ, UYW, UVZ, UVW

Under your proposal (pending), XYZ is registered in .cn, and the remaing set
of seven (7) names are reserved to the registrant.
	
Deng wants users to be able to visit his domain name. Some live in Mainland
China, some in Hongkong, some in Maco, some in Taiwan, and some in North
America.

Deng now has to register or otherwise map the following seven (7) names to
the same ip address (1.2.3.1):

	{XYZ, XYW, XVZ, XVW, UYZ, UYW, UVZ, UVW}.cn (ip addr 1.2.3.1)

This will avoid surprising Chinese who are accustomed to the SC <-> TC
equivalence, who _know_ that all eight (8) are equivalent as identifiers,
even if they appear to non-Chinese eyes as distinct "words" or characters.

In your proposal the registrant can create new equivalence rules, in the
worst case, only known to the registrant, e.g., ignoring the Y <-> V map,
creating
	{XYZ, XYW, UYZ, UYW}.cn (ip addr 1.2.3.1)
and
	{XVZ, XVW, UVZ, UVW}.cn (ip addr 1.2.3.2)

An additional issue is the temporal duration of your proposal. In the SC/TC
map, there is no expiry of the equivalence mapping. In your proposal there
is a reservation, how long does it last?

Eric