Subject: [iucg] ADN

From: jefsey <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 04:21:54 +0200

Vint Cerf as a Chair of the WG-IDNABIS steers his WG outside of its 
Charter, trying to give it a linguistic legitimacy. This 
unfortunately removes credibility and therefore technical legitimacy 
to that WG. He just chose to try to shut my mouth in _removing_ me 
from the list!

Actually, this is a good metter. This means that my position (to 
support users linguistic empowerment rather than their linguistic 
control by Google engineers) gains support. This eventually shows 
that most probably the IDNA proposition is not going to be ready 
anytime very soon, and will be disputed at IETF LC level.

Our user problem is to stabilise now a linguistic Domain Name 
practice as soon as possible. If IDNA2008 fails us, we need to deploy 
a solution than we can use asap without depending on IETF 
(organised?) delays and ICANN limitations. That also can support 
semantic addressing.

I therefore propose you that we write in the shortest delay an I_D 
for information we will ask the IESG to accept. It would describe our 
existing/immediately possible practice.

The principle is simple: it is a transparent generalisation of IDNs, 
we call ADN (Applied Domain Names). These domain names:
- are built in the xx-- format (except xn--).
- the "xx--" header tells the application which coding/decoding 
algorithm to use.
- TLD and zone managers accept their registrations without any 
special consideration. ADNs are user applications layer app2app 
codes: it belongs to these applications to deal with them.

We only need to create an IUCG header table (ADNH) for the code 
(header) of the various possible algorithms.

Comments welcome.
jfc