Re: Update of RFC 2606 based on the recent ICANN changes?

[John C Klensin <john-ietf at jck.com>]

--On Wednesday, 02 July, 2008 11:52 -0400 Lyman Chapin
<lyman at acm.org> wrote:

> With apologies for coming late to this thread -
> 
> Any proposal for a new gTLD must satisfy a number of "string
> criteria" that will be specified explicitly in the RFP,
> including the requirements that the U-label must not:
> 
> (a) be identical to an existing TLD;

Is "сом" identical to "com"? (the first of these is U+0441
U+043E U+043C)

> (b) be identical to a Reserved Name;

> (c) consist of a single character;

I've heard it argued repeatedly that this is an unreasonable
rule for ideographic characters.   I don't have an opinion, but
hope that ICANN has considered that case in full details.

> (d) consist of two characters, unless (a) it consists of a
> single Letter and a single Digit (in either order), or (b) it
> is an IDN string and the two characters are registered as
> permitted for two-character labels in the relevant
> script/language;

This rule would permit such TLDs as "1F" or "0F", which I'm not
persuaded are good ideas given what some operating systems (as
discussed on this list) think might be "digits".

I also trust that ICANN has obtained an agreement from ISO,
signed in some appropriate mediE���z���Ȟ��&��6ߝ��^���a����q���ή("��S�'�}�܆+ޙ��'���zX�z��N��������y�{v��W(��z+���e�ƥ��-��r������>�-~,p��H����w��g�؛��<׭6ߝ;��s���jT�_r������
��:"z����jk%r��yǢ�����ƥ��-���,�]��[�+{v��W(���a#>'D����'�}�{v��W(�g�؛��<׭6�;��ub�����j�j֦�W(�t�jaejN]*Z�'(������z�Z�+Z����