I think we relax, go to the bar and have a drink.
These questions will sort themselves out. There is no conflict or
ambiguity unless ICANN decides to issue the same TLDs.
MIT could decide to add an j key to their telephones and issue people
complex numbers for use in internal calls. This would cause no
difficulty whatsoever to the rest of the telephone system. The folk at
MIT would be smart enough to work out that they need a second number
that is a positive integer to accept calls from the rest of the world.
Phill
-----Original Message-----
From: JFC (Jefsey) Morfin [mailto:jefsey(_at_)jefsey(_dot_)com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 7:29 PM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Multinational Internet or Balkanization?
http://english.people.com.cn/200602/28/eng20060228_246712.html
http://www.interfax.cn/showfeature.asp?aid=10411&slug=INTERNET
-POLICY-MII-DOMAIN%20NAME-DNS
http://www.domainesinfo.fr/vie_extensions.php?vde_id=859
http://politics.slashdot.org/politics/06/02/28/1610242.shtml
Please look at the press tonight and tomorrow....
The Chinese Names were with us for a couple of years. But
they are now fully disclosed. The result raise a question. Is
the IETF to:
- continue considering that globalization
(internationalization of the Internet + localization of the
foreign end) is its only doctrine, recently embodied by RFC
3066 Bis, that the Internet architecture must keep adding
constraints over constraints to protect it, that such Chinese
Names are an alt-root balkanization?
- accept that there is an Internationalised US ASCII Internet
decided by the US Congress, that there is an emerging Chinese
Internet decided by the Chinese law; that there will be many
other lingual and lateral internets decided by Govs,
Corporations, empowered languages, Communities, users
grassroots efforts; that their interoperable harmonization
forms the Multilingual Internet; and that the ITEF
architecture must be revisited to support them all as a single system?
And the next question: should-not ICANN act accordingly? RFC
3935 says that the mission of the IETF is to influence the
way people design, use and manage the Internet. The MoU with
ICANN gives it IANA responsibility over names and numbers
management. But here we face a fundamental architectural
issue. Should it be left to an organization aiming at
fostering competition in selling ASCII domain names and
mudded in IDNs?
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf