Re: [eppext] what to do about IDN tables

"Gould, James" <> Wed, 04 November 2015 21:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D6DD1A8912 for <>; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 13:23:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ef6ggboTRuSa for <>; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 13:23:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D82B1A8919 for <>; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 13:23:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by oige129 with SMTP id e129so3899350oig.2 for <>; Wed, 04 Nov 2015 13:23:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:thread-topic:thread-index :date:message-id:references:in-reply-to:accept-language :content-language:content-type:mime-version; bh=kxHARzAgfbyP5mcIP7mFFAVYXlj71U8NVV1qi9TPkO8=; b=FAfbe8UY9atbUpct9q6xLOc0281JldyDnFqGtPQSPPcm2A687NbWHc7PztWdl8dITG 4cBERUh9lCmRILUXeEC5zFUI3uuF4DtWCE2wpBkICPdK6aR0gw+RS/haG/D1dpdETXkE 1tqdztaHdZ7PTPNwtXPG5f59PI0BuNQ7DUGkfW7m92hZV6yzcj1xO/eBqmzfplAKLwQT tX++EtLOwtKo+9jc8e/yFgv9Ho1906cU8tRCeMYBV4MPTzKx9kFJeb1qF4+kwW9hkICb tlOHZ4ubxnNoVn89LI5NXCG6/Nnd3w1iX0E1orBM24FHaGqZT8Bhf1tZgXDlxO0UqgCO xJ/A==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlCv/4gEdyyU/pMRyAOfJyAHTgVCzFQ5Qj/jh47jqPwRgKnZtlsCvFmfPNo5Xt0BKaqzVJPilB6zlucOpT/t3ucwLAcAg==
X-Received: by with SMTP id v95mr3939461qge.33.1446672214053; Wed, 04 Nov 2015 13:23:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by with ESMTPS id e7sm379015qkj.7.2015. (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 04 Nov 2015 13:23:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (brn1wnexchm01 []) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tA4LNXcx027299 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 4 Nov 2015 16:23:33 -0500
Received: from ([::1]) by ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 16:23:33 -0500
From: "Gould, James" <>
To: James Galvin <>
Thread-Topic: [eppext] what to do about IDN tables
Thread-Index: AQHRF0PiqeN8i/QNCEKdGyavsE9j056Ms2YA
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 21:23:32 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_004_973C1210541C46DC8754D06B1799DC4Averisigncom_"; type="multipart/alternative"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Cc: eppext <>
Subject: Re: [eppext] what to do about IDN tables
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: EPPEXT <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 21:23:37 -0000


I will be speaking to draft-gould-idn-table at meeting.  I haven’t reviewed draft-wilcox-cira-idn-eppext, so I’m unsure of the overlap with draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap and draft-gould-idn-table.   The authors of draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap and I created draft-gould-idn-table to address one key item missing from draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap which was how to identify the valid set of table identifiers to pass using draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap for an IDN domain name.  We discussed the issue on the list over a period of time, where I was proposing to use language instead of a table identifier.  We agreed to stick with the table identifier, but we needed a reliable way to determine the table identifiers specific to the server, which is addressed with draft-gould-idn-table.  Both draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap and draft-gould-idn-table have been implemented in the Verisign EPP SDK that includes a client and server implementation.  Ideally draft-gould-idn-table and draft-ietf-eppext-idnmap would move up together, but if not draft-gould-idn-table should be included in the next set of working group documents.

Let me know if you have any additional questions.





James Gould
Distinguished Engineer

12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190<>

On Nov 4, 2015, at 4:01 PM, James Galvin <<>> wrote:

A question that will be asked in the working group meeting today is what to do about IDN tables?

There is a working group document that has recently expired:


This document is languishing because Francisco has not gotten the required implementation statements yet.  We can certainly revive it but we may need to consider moving forward with incomplete implementation reports.

In addition, there were two related individual submissions that have also recently expired:


These three documents are not all the same but they are related.  The question is how to move forward.

Are Gould and Wilcox withdrawing their documents?  Are they going to seek publication in the EPP Extensions Registry?

If they want to seek being adopted by the working group then we will need to address the apparent relationship with the existing working group document.

Comments and suggestions are welcome.



EppExt mailing list<>