Re: [idn] Registration Policies

["Eugene M. Kim" <ab@astralblue.com>]

Yes, it is true that such registrars are actually making a void promise
-- in a sense.  We don't even know whether the IDN will be deployed
under ccTLDs only, under .com/.net/.org only, or under both.  And again,
they can't 100% guarantee that they will get the name that customers
have `reserved' with them, especially because it is expected that there
will be a big burst in name registration volume.

And a question: is it still within the IDN WG's scope to decide where to
deploy IDN (i.e. under non-ccTLDs)?

Thank you,
Eugene

On Tue, 23 May 2000, Patrik [iso-8859-1] Fältström wrote:

| At 07.55 +0200 00-05-23, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
| >Summary: plenty of worry, plenty of talking, not clear how it will be done.
| 
| What I personally is most worried about is the "preregistration" 
| which some registrars are doing regarding IDN, and promises to 
| customers that whatever is registered now will be registered in 
| whatever the standard MINC/IETF will come up with.
| 
| I can not see how that kind of promise can be published, given that 
| it is unclear how/if canonicalization and case folding is to be done 
| (or not).
| 
| So, as Harald states, lots of worries, plenty of talking...
| 
| If at least people could agree on those issues, so the semantics were 
| sorted out (but I guess that is the hard part of this game?).
| 
|    paf
| 

-- 
Eugene M. Kim <ab@astralblue.com>

"Is your music unpopular?  Make it popular; make music
which people like, or make people who like your music."