Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

Future of the net : Global or local ?

By Aldebaran in Internet
Tue Nov 28, 2000 at 01:24:34 PM EST
Tags: Internet (all tags)

With the introduction of chinese character in domain name, a new problem arraises : Could we allow the same domain name belonging to differents registrars with different character sets or the whole system is obsolete ? It is too lateto change the whole domain name system ?

First sorry for my english, this is not my native language.

At the beginning of november , VeriSign Global Registry Services was to begin accepting non-English characters. But whith the choosen approach, this will allow two differents company to own the same domain name with differents characters sets

This demonstrate two things :
Obsolescence of the ICANN and the actual domain name system.

Why not translating everything in UNICODE in the root servers ? This will allow really a global internet and not the fractionnal of the net we are observing now where only lawyer will be happy .

The more difficult will be to go back and to change the system, people who paid for a domain name using chinese Charsets doesn't want to see their investment spoiled.

The question is : This is too late and the end of the whole domain name system ? Must they restrict new charset to country TLD as .cn ?

links :

The Star

NY Daily News


Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure


The net must go regional or global ?
o Yes, allow same name in differents charset 9%
o No, a domain name should remain unique. 20%
o Convert all the TLD and domain names to rot13 34%
o Announce the end of Icann 34%

Votes: 43
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o The Star
o NY Daily News
o Also by Aldebaran

Display: Sort:
Future of the net : Global or local ? | 10 comments (3 topical, 7 editorial, 0 hidden)
UNICODE in the browser/protocol stack (4.00 / 2) (#8)
by jabber on Tue Nov 28, 2000 at 11:59:44 AM EST

This is a very interesting problem.

In my opinion, UNICODE is the answer, but not in the central servers. The servers should presume UNICODE by default, and this would be a clean transition since ASCII maps right into the same locations in UNICODE. All domain names ought to be mapped to a UNICODE representation before leaving a client machine - they should be submitted to DNS in a UNICODE form, resolved and the numerical counterpart used.

For web sites, this could easily be done by the browser (application level), where you would type in the name in your native language/char-set, and the browser would translate it into UNICODE. But what about other applications, like FTP and SMTP? Putting this logic into all applications is a Bad Thing.

Central servers could do the mapping, given the address and its char-set, but that's more work for the already busy server - so it should be done on the client, but not in the application layer... IP is too low level, we're already twiddling the bits of resolved, numerical addresses there... Transport layer? I'm a bit rusty on my TCP/IP stack model. Wherever the address resolution is is where this ought to be done (IMO of course). So that the application provides the address sought, along with it's local encoding, and as a matter of routine DNS address lookup, the address is converted to UNICODE prior to being submitted for resolution.

[TINK5C] |"Is K5 my kapusta intellectual teddy bear?"| "Yes"

legacy apps (none / 0) (#9)
by codemonkey_uk on Wed Nov 29, 2000 at 08:05:06 AM EST

The solution you propose is a good one, but the reality is that any change made to the server must support legacy apps, as it is impractical, ney, impossable to upgrade all the clients world wide.

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there is no good evidence either way." - Bertrand Russell
[ Parent ]
UTF-8 (none / 0) (#10)
by eskimoses on Wed Nov 29, 2000 at 09:42:39 AM EST

An even better solution would be to use UTF-8. Since UTF-8 maps the Unicode character set directly onto 8-bit ASCII, old-school domain names would continue to work, while new domain names would simply make full use of the 8-bit ASCII set to represent 16-bit Unicode characters.

See the PHP manual for the mapping rules.

[ Parent ]
Future of the net : Global or local ? | 10 comments (3 topical, 7 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!