Re: quick & dirty (but not too dirty) homograph defense

tedd wrote:
> As I understand it, this would only require a change in mapping. That 
> should solve at least one "glyph look-alike" problem -- shouldn't it?

Anything involving changes in the way IDNA works (through changing
mappings, or restricting characters further on the client side) is
not a solution, whatever the problem. Any such change will take ten
years or more to implement.

Regards,
Martin