[vip] Educational session on existing variant practices

[Vladimir Shadrunov]

Hi Andrew and thanks for your comment.

I perfectly understand your points. However, I heard a number of times that
DNAME or some other xNAME may be part of the solution for the problem we are
trying to define. There may be members of this group who do not know well
what DNAME is and I think a 5-10 minute presentation may fill this gap.

With regards to the work of IETF there are RFCs that consider variants and
string similarity, at least for Chinese and Cyrillic scripts. I believe this
is very relevant to the work of this group and as these are finished work
products I believe it may be useful for the group to learn if the variant
issues were defined and dealt with in these RFCs.

Best regards,
Vladimir Shadrunov

On 4 July 2011 22:03, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:

> Dear colleagues,
>
> I think this is an excellent suggestion worthy of pursuit.  I have one
> remark, however.
>
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 11:04:07AM +0100, Vladimir Shadrunov wrote:
>
> > If someone active in the IETF community would be willing to give a
> > presentation on how existing DNS standards and related RFC handle string
> > similarity that would also be great. Additionally some feedback from the
> IP
> > lawyers would be appreciated as to whether the variant problem exists in
> the
> > IP realm.
>
> I can certainly provide an overview of how various DNS technologies
> can be used to help with label-string similarity issues.  There are
> some tricks one can use in the DNS that make some of these issues in
> some ways easier, and in some ways trickier, to deal with.
>
> But the short answer to the question as phrased above is much more
> blunt, and I want to put it here on the list so that it is not lost.
> The existing DNS standards and related RFCs do nothing at all about
> string similarity.  DNS is an exact-match technology.  You send a
> query for a QNAME, QCLASS, and QTYPE.  If there is an entry in the
> authoritative name server you happen to talk to, or some in
> intermediate cache, that matches _exactly_ your requested combination,
> you get back an answer.  If there is the same name but something else
> doesn't match, you get back an empty answer with no error (or,
> sometimes, a redirection).  And if there is no such name in the
> authoritative servers, you get back "NXDOMAIN" (that is, RCODE=3 Name
> Error).
>
> This is a deep and fundamental part of the DNS, and it is important we
> not lose sight of it; it is not something we can change without
> effectively replacing the DNS itself.  Anything that we cannot
> ultimately simulate by adding to the number of exact matches in the
> global DNS -- that is, making the DNS bigger -- is just not a policy
> that can ever be deployed.
>
> Best regards,
>
> A
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/vip/attachments/20110705/dd5f44a1/attachment.html