On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 11:33:14AM +0100, john daw wrote: > > Dear List Members,I am a little unclear what impact the IDNA 2008 > policy will have ondomain name registrant's who have a domain that > does not fall underthe policy's permissible code-points, Which "the policy" do you mean? IDNA2008 isn't about policy, it's about protocol. Indeed, the RFCs, if you read them carefully, explicitly suggest that zone operators (or "registries", but this does not mean only TLD operators) need to have policies about what particular code points they will allow. In my view, the right answer for most cases is a "default closed" with explicit allowance of particular characters or ranges that you understand. > particularly symbol-based domainnames.The page > http://icann.org/en/topics/idn/fast-track/idna-protocol-2003.txtclearly > explains what codes are permissible That is not the table for IDNA2008. It's for 2003. The basic approaches in 2008 and 2003 are different. I suggest reading RFC5894 for more background. > itmean if someone types in e.g. â.com in their browser under IDNA > 2008? Will IDNA 2008 not allow the domain registrant to satisfy a > user's queryby forwarding them on to a different domain name? The euro-currency sign is not a valid character in a U-label, and therefore that domain is not valid under IDNA2008. Conforming implementations are not supposed to do a lookup for that domain. It is possible that such a character would be mapped _prior to_ getting into the IDNA2008 algorithms. There does not appear to be universal agreement about how to map these things. In that case in particular, I don't know what you'd map it to. > I'm > curious to know how such domain names have been disabled, > andprevented them from being shown/resolving. The mechanism for this is outlined in the IDNA2008 documents, RFCs 5890, 5891, 5892, and 5893. I suggest reading 5894 too if you want to understand. Note that none of this has much to do with your subject line, as near as I can tell. There is no effort in IDNA2008 to prevent "confusable" characters in domain names. That's not even a goal consistent, at the protocol level, with expanding the available character repertoire, though you could address many issues with good policy for zone operation. A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxx Shinkuro, Inc. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf