FW: [rfc-dist] RFC 3743 on Joint Engineering Team (JET) Guidelines forInternationalized Domain Names (IDN) Registration and Administration for Chinese, Japanese, and Korean

fyi.

Misha


-----Original Message-----
From: rfc-dist-bounces@mailman.rfc-editor.org
[mailto:rfc-dist-bounces@mailman.rfc-editor.org] On Behalf Of
rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Sent: 15 April 2004 00:48
To: rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 3743 on Joint Engineering Team (JET) Guidelines
forInternationalized Domain Names (IDN) Registration and Administration
for Chinese, Japanese, and Korean



A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.


        RFC 3743

        Title:      Joint Engineering Team (JET) Guidelines for
                    Internationalized Domain Names (IDN) Registration
                    and Administration for Chinese, Japanese, and
                    Korean
        Author(s):  K. Konishi, K. Huang, H. Qian, Y. Ko
        Status:     Informational
        Date:       April 2004
        Mailbox:    konishi@jp.apan.net, huangk@alum.sinica.edu,
                    Hlqian@cnnic.net.cn, yw@mrko.pe.kr
        Pages:      33
        Characters: 74963
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:    None

        I-D Tag:    draft-jseng-idn-admin-05.txt

        URL:        ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3743.txt


Achieving internationalized access to domain names raises many complex
issues.  These are associated not only with basic protocol design,
such as how names are represented on the network, compared, and
converted to appropriate forms, but also with issues and options for
deployment, transition, registration, and administration.

The IETF Standards for Internationalized Domain Names, known as
"IDNA", focuses on access to domain names in a range of scripts that
is broader in scope than the original ASCII.  The development process
made it clear that use of characters with similar appearances and/or
interpretations created potential for confusion, as well as
difficulties in deployment and transition.  The conclusion was that,
while those issues were important, they could best be addressed
administratively rather than through restrictions embedded in the
protocols.  This document defines a set of guidelines for applying
restrictions of that type for Chinese, Japanese and Korean (CJK)
scripts and the zones that use them and, perhaps, the beginning of a
framework for thinking about other zones, languages, and scripts.

This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list.
Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list
should be sent to IETF-REQUEST@IETF.ORG.  Requests to be
added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should
be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST@RFC-EDITOR.ORG.

Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending
an EMAIL message to rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body 
help: ways_to_get_rfcs.  For example:

        To: rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG
        Subject: getting rfcs

        help: ways_to_get_rfcs

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager@RFC-EDITOR.ORG.  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.echo 
Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to
RFC-EDITOR@RFC-EDITOR.ORG.  Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC
Authors, for further information.


Joyce K. Reynolds and Sandy Ginoza
USC/Information Sciences Institute

...

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant Mail Reader 
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version
of the RFCs.


-------------------------------------------------------------- --
        Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com

Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more
information and to register, visit http://www.reuters.com/messaging

Any views expressed in this message are those of  the  individual
sender,  except  where  the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Reuters Ltd.