[idn] about NSI ML-testbed and i-DNS proxy's vulnerability

["James Seng" <James@Seng.cc>]

non-member bounced. 

james

> From: "Soobok Lee" <lsb@postel.co.kr>
> To: <idn@ops.ietf.org>
> Subject: about NSI ML-testbed and i-DNS proxy's vulnerability
> Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 10:45:52 +0900

> 
> To  IDN :
> 
>  =20
>   I agree with Wissen's opinion about NSI practice on ML-Testbed =
> operation.
> 
>   =20
>   Before standards are finalized  ,
>     REAL consumers may hesitate to register ML .com domains=20
>     and  more opportunites will be  given to squatters.
>     Browsers,Webservers and PKI infrastructures are not ready!
>     Is NSI contributing to promotion of early domain squatting ?
> 
>   NSI could restrict testbed registration to subsets of the entire =
> namespace.
>     For example,  to ML-domains like "TEST-(CJK).com"  that is
>            prefixed by "TEST-".
>     This is enough for test purpose.
> 
>   The ML testbed and the huge groups of squatters and registrants=20
>      would make  influence on IETF/IDN processes.
>   IETF/IDN must not hurry and  must  not be under pressure to do so.
>   ICANN should comment on this...
> 
>   NSI's early Resolution phase appears to need a transistion solution , =
> i-dnx proxy.
>   But, i-DNS's DNS-PROXY  fails to resolve =20
>      native-code ML-queries from Netscape 4.X on WIN9X plaforms=20
>      without CCS conflicts. NN on WIN9X does not speak UTF8 on HTTP and =
> DNS queries.
>       It may mislead web surfers to wrong sites and may cause security =
> problems.
>       It may isolate Netscape users from others, contrary to IAB's =
> recommendation RFC 2825.
>    I-DNS proxy is dangerous to be deployed as a transition solution.
> 
>   Would you comment on this?   =20
>  =20
>   Regards,
> 
>   Soobok Lee,  lsb@postel.co.kr
> 
>      =20
>   =20
> 
> 
> all:
> 
> It appears that we have been misled as to the value of our participation
> in the multi-language testbed. Apparently Network Solutions Registrar =
> has
> declared how multi-language will work superseding the Verisign Registry,
> ICANN, the registrars participating in the ML-Testbed, and with
> complete disregard to any IETF standards on the process of managing
> Multi-language Domain Registrations.
> 
> For the complete announcement see =
> http://www.nsol.com/news/2000/pr_20001003.html
> 
> I am completely perplexed as to how NSI Registrar is able to traverse
> these issues without inside support from the NSI Registry. Not only am I
> alarmed, but I am concerned for the integrity and stability of the
> Internet put in jeopardy by Versign/NSI disregard of the standards and
> consensus processes.
> 
> As NSI stated in their press release "The Internet is never going to =
> look
> the same." and thats exactly what I am worried about. Even more
> interesting is that the Registry announcement of the testbed's start =
> date
> has not even been announced! NSI Registry won't even tell other =
> Registrars
> the date an announcement will be made.
> 
> I call upon ICANN to provide some oversight into the process of the
> multi-language domain name testbed ASAP and for ICANN to ensure that the
> standards and consensus processes are strictly adhered to by all =
> parties.
> 
> 
> regards,
> 
> -rick
> 
>