At 3:02 PM -0700 6/9/08, Doug Barton wrote: >I'm also not sure you quite understand the magnitude of the task you're >undertaking. It's a matter of fact that any sentence including the >phrase "all TLDs" is doomed from the start. :) You're dealing with a >wide variety of business models (often with competing interests), >policies, levels of technical ability, levels of operating capacity, and >dare I say it, personalities. You will never get full cooperation, and >as you can see by Stephane's response you will definitely irritate at >least some of the TLD operators with this change. You might want to >rethink socializing this concept before you launch.
Directly related to this is Mozilla's TLD-based IDN settings that Kim Davies mentioned at <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg06140.html>. If you go to the Mozilla page listed in that message, you will notice that a few TLDs that allow IDNs have not registered with Mozilla for various reasons (*cough* *cough* .com, .ru, .many-countries-in-the-arab-speaking-world, ...). This is reasonably good and local proof that Mozilla asking TLDs for information for this new registry is likely to result in incomplete information for many important TLDs. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
