Re: Domain check in draft-obispo-epp-idn-00.txt

What can I say, it would be great if the registrar put that kind of intelligence in their storefront and didn't send domain creates that violate a given language table.

Most registrars aren't making that extensive of an effort. Why? What if the registrar messes up on their filter and denies the registrant a registration the registry actually allows. Ooops starts to sound like a lawsuit, better the registrar makes the registry say no. It's cheaper to say no in domain check than a create. However I think there's room here to satisfy both concerns.

Adjust the domain check ext so the language tag element is optional. No language tag and it assumes a straight ASCII registration.

Then those registrars that want to validate their own work can and registrars that aren't sure can test a punycode string against the extended domain check. This seems like a compromise that works, thoughts?

-M


On 2012-01-04, at 2:18 PM, Patrik Fältström <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> On 4 jan 2012, at 19:46, Keith Gaughan wrote:
> 
>> No, this simply shoves the responsibility onto the registrar.
> 
> I agree.
> 
> Checking MUST be done at the registry.
> 
> Registrar push whatever domain name it believes might be possible to register. Either that succeeds or the registry is giving a result back that can be presented to the user.
> 
> So the registrar do broad filtering and helps the registrant, but then registry is doing the work.
> 
>   Patrik
> 
> _______________________________________________
> provreg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg
_______________________________________________
provreg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg