Re: [idn] Re: IDN Registration Integrity

["Adam M. Costello" <amc+ut6xyj@nicemice.net>]

AM <amitbusy@hotmail.com> wrote:

> As an individual concerned with the future of IDNs, I would like to
> recommend that ICANN seriously consider incorporating a clause in
> their registry agreements

I don't know how closely ICANN monitors this mailing list.

> that ensures registrants that their IDN registrations will be valid
> through all changes in registry operators, through all standards'
> progressions, through to the day when multi-lingual domains will be
> incorporated into zone files as are ASCII domains.

Non-ASCII IDNs are likely to start appearing very soon (if they haven't
already) in non-standard zone files for internal use by registry
operators, but standard zone files might continue to be ASCII-only for a
long time, maybe forever.  Widespread deployment of IDNs does not depend
on any upgrades to the zone file format or any other infrastructure;
upgrades of end-user applications is sufficent.

> The question at hand is are my current IDN registrations so-called
> "ICANN-certified" registrations, as are the ASCII domains of today?

Your current "IDN" registrations are not IDN registrations.  IDN did not
exist when those registrations were made.  Those registrations are part
of an experimental testbed based on a very early (and long ago rejected)
draft of IDNA.

> I would like to be assured that not just my ASCII "bq--" or "xn--"
> string will be "ICANN-certified" but that its multi-lingual equivalent
> will always be a constant registration, valid and governed by ICANN
> policies,

Your bq-- string under mltbd.com has no standard meaning; it means
whatever Verisign says it means, and Verisign can either discard it or
convert it to a standard IDN, at their whim.  They have announced plans
to convert these registrations, but I doubt there are (or will be) any
ICANN policies compelling them to do so.

But if you register an xn-- string at the second level (which is not
yet possible because ICANN has not yet opened the gates), it will have
a standard interpretation defined by IETF standards (not by Verisign
or ICANN), and will also be a regular ASCII domain name with the same
protections as any other ASCII domain name (unless those protections are
explicitly removed).

Disclaimer:  This is all to the best of my knowledge, but I have no
authority, and I don't speak for any of the organizations mentioned
above.

AMC