On 9/06/08 11:56 AM, "David Conrad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jun 9, 2008, at 9:34 AM, Gervase Markham wrote: >>> I'm curious: have you consulted with the various TLD-related >>> organizations (e.g., ccNSO, gNSO, CENTR, APTLD, AfTLD, LACTLD, >>> etc.) on >>> how to solve this problem? >> >> No. What do you think they'd say that hasn't been said in this thread >> already? > > You're talking about essentially creating a registry of their registry > policies and distributing it statically via your product. I would > imagine they might be interested and might even have some useful input > to provide. Some might even think it rude (even Microsoftian :-)) not > to ask. But perhaps I've been at layer 9 too long.
This thread sounds remarkably like deja vu. Indeed, the TLD community was rather upset a few years ago by Mozilla taking unilateral action to introduce a hard-coded white-list of acceptable IDN TLDs without prior consultation. It is not unreasonable to think that doing so for a second time, with the benefit of hindsight, would be received negatively. I'd also speculate much of the pros and cons to this discussion are equally applicable to the IDN whitelist. ( http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/tld-idn-policy-list.html) kim _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
