Re: Single-letter names

Eric Brunner-Williams <> Tue, 08 July 2008 16:11 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from [] (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3AC428C102; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 09:11:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CECC28C113 for <>; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 21:49:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OEyvmqRpsvLc for <>; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 21:49:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE1528C112 for <>; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 21:49:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clam-local.local ( [] (may be forged)) by (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m684gwor096957; Tue, 8 Jul 2008 00:42:58 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 23:49:42 -0500
From: Eric Brunner-Williams <>
User-Agent: Thunderbird (Macintosh/20080421)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ted Hardie <>
Subject: Re: Single-letter names
References: <C0F2465B4F386241A58321C884AC7ECC0706DD8A@E03MVZ2-UKDY.domain1.systemhost .net> <p06240609c497f5bee7f2@[]>
In-Reply-To: <p06240609c497f5bee7f2@[]>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 09:11:26 -0700
Cc: "" <>, "" <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"


As Edmond pointed out, the position at present is that:

"Single and two-character U-labels on the top level and second level of a domain name should not be restricted in general."

I personally expect that for applications made as "IDN ccTLD", whether 
"fasttrack" or not, will be reviewed for some "meaning". It is my 
understanding however, that in general, an application for a generic TLD 
is not, in the plan of record, presently reviewed for "meaning", at 
least, not in any sense that would preclude a single Unicode glyph.

Example, the Cree character for the "i" vowel (a delta triangle), 
encoded as xn--zce, is a "single character", and has no "sense" other 
than a vowel, is allowable, as is the ascii character sequence "iii", 
which also has no "sense" other than a (repeated) vowel.

Your milage may vary, etc.


Ted Hardie wrote:
> At 9:25 AM -0700 7/7/08, wrote:
>>> However, many concepts in modern Chinese
>> dialects require multiple syllables to express them and
>> therefore multiple characters to write them. So there isn't
>> really a one to one mapping of word, syllable, concept as
>> many people suppose.
> While there may not be a one-to-one mapping of word,
> character, and concept every time, there are many words
> and concepts which can be given (and commonly given)
> in a single character.  Forcing  those to use multiple characters
> to get around a policy limitation may introduce, rather than reduce confusion. 
> Why would we want to insist on that?
> 				Ted
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
Ietf mailing list