Re: [ire] Variant Domain Names

Bhadresh Modi <bmodi@afilias.info> Mon, 08 April 2013 17:06 UTC

Return-Path: <bmodi@afilias.info>
X-Original-To: ire@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ire@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9F5E21F9590 for <ire@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:06:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8NDIsvij5Lzp for <ire@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:06:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outbound.afilias.info (outbound.afilias.info [66.199.183.4]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1731321F9588 for <ire@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:06:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ms5.on1.afilias-ops.info ([10.109.8.9] helo=smtp.afilias.info) by outbound.afilias.info with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <bmodi@afilias.info>) id 1UPFWD-0005ay-3u for ire@ietf.org; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 17:06:09 +0000
Received: from mail-fa0-f71.google.com ([209.85.161.71]) by smtp.afilias.info with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <bmodi@afilias.info>) id 1UPFWC-0003Li-6D for ire@ietf.org; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 17:06:09 +0000
Received: by mail-fa0-f71.google.com with SMTP id w1so4915316fad.2 for <ire@ietf.org>; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 10:06:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=JiK73StojFsvnFCNBGI8A1lNzk70UPk5T7Ozz2Q94UI=; b=VHnBzP1qTp3esG11L9QfphDDEhsUnt3Zjrd3llYzPZrC7Owxl5CXwDH4cYfp0QmSHP 9UplN0BZ6kY7FME0A929uLFbqd3Q8lK/dnkP7q+1KbNGF2yXhxdyBcbGYxLAxzNiGwWj 9wh7WMEk7mfTK3D2v4EWAY7f/QwXEu+A7UlWKj4Fu6wxR581Pg0hcGARslORpRSjNsc9 UCfsGx+/6maC/GYqXFNvOLbuP7IoNERX7b62kiqwrEgtj/hcAz00pZY3tkgufGj69T/P 8FohBipjT8raMfOtSTNXkA/iwIjmxYTpCNGQZ/zCccLRe/ouysiC2NnONdlD4KwLUtsR jUGw==
X-Received: by 10.194.92.231 with SMTP id cp7mr15791476wjb.19.1365440762884; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 10:06:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.92.231 with SMTP id cp7mr15791464wjb.19.1365440762723; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 10:06:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.217.117.1 with HTTP; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:06:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20130408164904.GC22596@mx1.yitter.info>
References: <CD87DA9F.76C42%james.mitchell@ausregistry.com.au> <CAMi4Txwx_9w0EzsTD8Uhp-0cR7rmSkTVvN75PZ4uKYZrQ6ewng@mail.gmail.com> <20130408164904.GC22596@mx1.yitter.info>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 13:06:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMi4TxzsnHghFM2dLNp48B2TFE8PFsD2dKrtMJQRktE2zKGs=g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bhadresh Modi <bmodi@afilias.info>
To: ire@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bfd0c2e9fd46c04d9dc7330
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkxKBgog19+/uiMMVnv26VCU/xE8Sdlaxp2vVJHdItIfp2vfgewAgX1xso27JvjlZyd0BCCB4wzQAb6wtQv9fSK5WDMKfubcBLO3PQY6Wgf+cDZQxZu9kVd03fObgQaRHQUTcLZ
Subject: Re: [ire] Variant Domain Names
X-BeenThere: ire@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Internet Registration Escrow discussion list." <ire.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ire>, <mailto:ire-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ire>
List-Post: <mailto:ire@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ire-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ire>, <mailto:ire-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 17:06:11 -0000

More precise terms are certainly helpful, I think the main point is that
the current set of "blocked" and "withheld" as shown in the draft is
insufficient.

Perhaps it makes sense to simply use the same terms with the same
definitions from the IDN TLD project that Andrew provided.

Regards,
Bhadresh

On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>wrote:

> I have no idea how those terms got adopted, but I'd like to point out
> the distinctions that were made by the variant issues project/IDN TLD
> project:
>
> Delegated: actually in a zone with an SOA and parent NS RRset.
>
> Activated: in the DNS somehow.  (Delegated is a species of activated.
> For instance, a DNAME would be activated but not delegated.)
>
> Allocated: someone has administrative control over the name, but it is
> not activated.  For instance, any domain on Hold in EPP would be
> allocated.
>
> Blocked: nobody is allowed to register the name.  For instance, in
> .com nobody may register the label example (so example.com is
> blocked).
>
> I think these distinctions are all extremely useful.
>
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 12:07:18PM -0400, Bhadresh Modi wrote:
> > I agree - we were using the "allocated" value in the previous revision to
> > differentiate between IDN variants that simply blocked registration and
> > variants that would actual resolve similar to the original domain name.
> >  With the omission of this value there is no longer any way to express
> this.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bhadresh
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:29 AM, James Mitchell <
> > james.mitchell@ausregistry.com.au>; wrote:
> >
> > > Gustavo,
> > >
> > > I would like the nameState of NNDNs to include "activated". The
> > > "allocated" value was in revision –01, however seems to have
> disappeared
> > > without reason? Adding "allocated" would make the NNDN consistent with
> the
> > > text in Section 6 that states that either domain objects or NNDNs may
> be
> > > used to represent variants.
> > >
> > > Also, the NNDN <crDate> should be optional as some registries may not
> > > track the creation date of reserved list entries.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > James
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > ire mailing list
> > > ire@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ire
> > >
> > >
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > ire mailing list
> > ire@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ire
>
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs@anvilwalrusden.com
> _______________________________________________
> ire mailing list
> ire@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ire
>