[vip] Suggested meta-questions to think about

[Siavash Shahshahani]

Hi Patrik,
It is so refreshing and so welcome to see someone of high standing with
ICANN establishent, especially someone reared in Latin alphabet, to show
genuine and spontaneous interest in this set of problems. I am
intentionally 
talking about a 'set of problems' and not a monolithic 'Variant Problem' 
because talking about 'the variant problem' is like talking about 'the
rest 
of the world' versus 'us-the normal'. To me, the present ICANN VIP
endeavor
is something between a postponement tactic and a benign academic exercise.
At best, the only outcome of this project would be raising awareness of
the 
Latin script community of the existence of the 'problem'. Especially
useless 
is wasting time on 'definitions'. This shows ignorance of the diversity of

the problems we face. All we need are 'functional working definitions' to 
ensure precision of communication; let us leave the rest to the academia. 

The important thing to note is that not all IDN Problems are created
equal:
Some are very crucial and immediate from end-user standpoint, some can be
managed over time. There is no single answer to whether variant strings
should be treated as one application or multiple applications, etc, etc. 
And now to a concrete question you raise:

> And then there might be a technical question in there...
> C.1. Given two domain names are variants of each other, is there
something
> that can be done in the DNS from a technical point of view to express
that,
> or can we only do delegations?
> 
> The really tricky question is of course to really draw the line between
> variants and not variants. I think the line from a technical point of
view,
> AND the implications on the second questions, should be for the new TLD
> approval process be as conservative as possible.
> 
> Default answer: If someone want two domain names, just send in two
> applications.
> 
> Exception: As you desperately need both and not only one of the domain
> names, you will get both treated as one application.
> 
> Then ICANN ask IETF formally "can you please let us know if it is
possible
> to have some kind of solution for _technically_ link two TLDs with each
> other, in a safe and stable way". Via a letter to IAB.
 
This is different from the statement coming from Dennis Jennings with
assured tone that a solution is 25 years away. We have been using DNames at
second level for .ir for six years with no problems. I am not claiming this
will necessarily work at the root level, nor that it should be the
universal solution. But a solution for us is an absolute necessity because
delegating only one of the two alternate A-labels would amount to rendering
useless half of the keyboards in use in the country. We can't help thinking
cynically  that if Iran had the political clout of China, then ICANN would
be more open to actively seeking a solution.
Regards,
Siavash