[governance] Hi norbert,nance] ICANN declined Bulgarian IDN fast-track

[Karl Auerbach]

On 06/28/2010 12:42 PM, Avri Doria wrote:

> leading digits are being considered unsafe.

Really?

We've had names in DNS with leading digits ever since the inception of 
DNS - we have the very early (from the 1980's) example "3com.com".

And doing a whois query for names with leading digits e.g. whois 3\* 
tends to reveal that names with leading digits are rather common.

There is, of course an ambiguity when the FQDN (fully qualified domain 
name) contains exactly four labels and each label consists of from one 
to three digits which, if treated as a value, range from 0 to 255.  In 
that case the name looks a lot like an IPv4 address.  That, of course, 
can be remedied by banning TLDs consisting of 0-3 digits that would have 
a value of 0 to 255.

(Is there is any similar potential ambiguity with IPv6 addresses?)

		--karl--

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t