Re: [apps-discuss] CONTEXTJ in TLD DNS-Labels (draft-liman-tld-names-05)

[Patrik Fältström <[e-mail]>]

On 19 jul 2011, at 03.01, Behnam Esfahbod wrote:

> 2. If ZWNJ is claimed to cause confusion and phishing problems beyond what is
>   normally acceptable for other symbols, it is up to the claimants to
>   demonstrate this claim.

Actually, no.

When discussing security and stability of the Internet as a whole, it is the other way around. The first general principle is to ensure you do no harm. Then one can discuss whether the change is actually valuable.

So the burden of convincing the community is on the ones that do think a character like ZWNJ is to be allowed or not that the need for the character is greater than the potential harm in _any_ context it might be used in.

Yes, I am chair of ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee, and this I say is just a hint of what kind of statement and question will be asked when/if a proposal about the use of ZWNJ will actually reach ICANN pdp. This statement of mine does not of course preclude any kind of potential SSAC statement. Just a hint of what questions SSAC might ask.

For the rest of your points, including how difficult this discussion has ended up being -- I agree with you.

   Patrik