Re: [Fwd: Re: [alac] FW: Review and Recommendations for Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs)]

["Siavash Shahshahani" <shahshah@xxxxxxxx>]

Just a few quick observations:
1. If I understand correctly, Internet penetration coefficient for China
is around 11%. I believe this 11% is capable of typing in Latin letters
just for the address, even though I agree it is much more desirable to be
able to do it in the native script and IDNs provide additional choice in
domain names. What I wish to emphasize is that despite what some
politicians are saying, IDN is not a PRESSING problem at this time.
2. Verisign is obviously interested in the huge China market, but mainly
for the future. That's why they were(are?)pushing for DNames.
3. I agree with you that research should start(and it has by Klensin and
others) on alternatives to the present DNS.
Siavash

> I'm in the middle of something so cannot spend much time on our
> interesting discussions. The "hard data" may be Verisign's
> registration statistics of Chinese-character domain names. The People
> who are in the second-largest Internet community in the world and
> using the non-alphabet characters are feeling the constraints of the
> Latin-script DNS every day. They are keenly want to use their native
> scripts. Therefore, Verisign indulges in find such a big market and
> eventually stirred up the reactions from other stakeholders.
>
> I'm not opposing IDNs (including IDN.IDN), but what I'm intend to
> emphasize is that the users' demand for non-Latin script could have
> been resolved outside the DNS. Since it's determined to provide the
> solution within the DNS for whatever reasons--and thus regulated or
> constrained by the DNS , the solution should at least fulfil its
> fundamental mission--useful to users.
>
> Hong
>
> On 10/18/06, Siavash Shahshahani <shahshah@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> As someone intimately involved with implementing IDNs in the last few
>> years, I find much of the debate totally irrelevant to the little
>> end-user, and I'm afraid IDN has become a field for politicians and
>> commercial interests. I'd like to see Hong or anybody else provide me
>> some
>> hard data or research results on how many real people truly feel
>> disadvantaged by the DNS system as it exists. The fact is that Internet
>> has not yet reached those people who would feel the disadvantage, i.e.,
>> those in the third world totally unfamiliar with Latin script. And let
>> me
>> emphasize that unfamiliarity with Latin alphabet is not the reason why
>> Internet penetration is low in disadvantaged countries. Of course I'd
>> love
>> to see DNS replaced some day with a more script-neutral system, but I
>> haven't observed any immediate pressing need for this at this moment.
>> Let me relate my personal experience as the head of a ccTLD that has
>> implemented IDNs: The lack of interest in IDNs after one year is so
>> overwhelming('underwhelming?') that we decided to offer as incentive a
>> free one-year ASCII domain to IDN registrants. In the last few months
>> before this, IDN registration rate had fallen to one-hundredth of ASCII
>> registration. In our survey of the reasons for the lack on interest, the
>> lack of IDN.IDN ranked fifth among five proposed reasons. Still of
>> course
>> I am for IDN.IDN, but let us keep sober about all this.
>> Siavash
>>
>> > Confucius said: 'Is it not gentlemanly not to take offense when others
>> > fail to understand what you mean?'
>> >
>> > The non-Latin script users are so gentlemanly that they would not even
>> > take offense of the message, let along shooting the messengers.
>> >
>> > The term "IDN" is actually a paradox.  Domain names in the American
>> > Standard Code for Information Interchange is already
>> > internationalized--they are being used prevalently around the world.
>> > Enabling native non-Latin scripts used in the web/email addresses
>> > should be going to another direction--localization to cater the local
>> > language users' demand. Then, why do we have a term "internationalized
>> > domain names"? Say, are domain names in Yiddish scripts so
>> > internationalized as to be usable by Korean people? Yiddish is still
>> > for some Jewish communities, and Korean is still for Korean.
>> >
>> > All the difficulties are caused by forcing the localized solutions
>> > into the internationalized context. If it had not been some corporate
>> > giant(s) that zealously pursued commercial interests by starting
>> > registration of domain names in non-Latin scripts and thus framed this
>> > issue into the DNS, all kinds of localized solutions--probably at the
>> > application level above the DNS--would have developing steadily and
>> > healthly. Ordinary users won't mind whether there are IDN roots or
>> > mapping or punycode. They simply want to use their scripts. We should
>> > remember who had hijacked the development direction and threw out the
>> > concept of IDNs that must be resolved in the DNS.
>> >
>> > If after ages of profound research,  those highly respectable experts
>> > conclude that there is no way to realize the IDNs, then at least users
>> > may expect some localized though imperfect solution to address their
>> > need. But on the contrary, the experts insist that IDNs can be done
>> > and will be done in a way that is different from what the users
>> > believe happens or should happen. Then, what is the meaning of the
>> > IDNs if they are useless to the users?
>> >
>> > Hong
>> >
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> IPM/IRNIC
>> P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq.
>> Tehran 19548, Iran
>> Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113
>> Cell: (+98 912)104 2501
>> Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00
>> Email: shahshah@xxxxxxxx, shahshah@xxxxxx
>> -----------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> IPM/IRNIC
>> P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq.
>> Tehran 19548, Iran
>> Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113
>> Cell: (+98 912)104 2501
>> Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00
>> Email: shahshah@xxxxxxxx, shahshah@xxxxxx
>> -----------------------------------------------
>>
>


-------------------------------------------------
IPM/IRNIC
P.O.Box 19395-5564, Shahid Bahonar Sq.
Tehran 19548, Iran
Phone: (+98 21) 22 82 80 80; 22 82 80 81, ext 113
Cell: (+98 912)104 2501
Fax: (+98 21) 22 29 57 00
Email: shahshah@xxxxxxxx, shahshah@xxxxxx
-----------------------------------------------