Network Working Group X. LEE Internet-Draft E. CHEN Expires: February 23, 2006 J. Klensin N. HSU W. MAO Aug. 22, 2005 Registration and Administration Guideline for Chinese Domain Names draft-xdlee-idn-cdnadmin-04.txt Status of this Memo By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 23, 2006. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). Abstract Most of the Chinese domain names will have variants, this memo specifies the proposed procedure to register and administrate Chinese domain names based on [RFC3743] to avoid the conflict among the variants. LEE, et al. Expires February 23, 2006 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Guideline for Chinese Domain Names Aug. 2005 Table of Contents 1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1. Chinese Characters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.2. Chinese Domain Name Label (CDNL) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.3. Simplified Chinese Variant Table (SCVT) . . . . . . . . . 5 3.4. Traditional Chinese Variant Table (TCVT) . . . . . . . . . 5 3.5. Original Chinese Domain Name Label (OCDNL) . . . . . . . . 5 4. Procedure for CDNLs registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 10 LEE, et al. Expires February 23, 2006 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Guideline for Chinese Domain Names Aug. 2005 1. Requirements notation The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. LEE, et al. Expires February 23, 2006 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Guideline for Chinese Domain Names Aug. 2005 2. Introduction Non-ASCII characters are included in the DNS using the methods of Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA, described in [RFC3490], [RFC3491] and [RFC3492]), so it is possible for users to access Internet with their native languages, most of which are not English. Many languages have special requirements which are not addressed in the IDNA RFCs. For example, effective use of Chinese domain names (CDN) requires variant equivalence to handle apparent character differences between Simplified and Traditional Chinese. Chinese variant equivalence itself is very complicated. The basic requirement is to match the user perception that a Simplified Chinese (SC) domain name should be equal to its Traditional Chinese (TC) form. When they register SC domain names, they do want the traditional forms, and expect others to be able to access their sites by other forms, and vice versa. This document specifies a solution for Chinese domain name registration and administration to manage Simplified Chinese and Traditional Chinese domain name equivalence. This solution, based on [RFC3743], is suitable for any DNS zone manager or registrar who provides Chinese domain names service. In the terminology of [RFC3743], this solution is IDL-based (Internationalized Domain Label). LEE, et al. Expires February 23, 2006 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Guideline for Chinese Domain Names Aug. 2005 3. Terminology This document adopts the terminologies that are defined in [RFC3743]. In order to describe the problem simply, we define some additional terminologies. 3.1. Chinese Characters Since few people will even attempt to use all Chinese characters, this document suggests permitting only a subset of Chinese characters in CDN, i.e., in the DNS. When this document discusses Chinese characters, we only refer to a subset made up of the characters in the first column of the tables in 3.3 and 3.4. These are defined, in detail, in [LVT-CN] and [LVT-TW]. Of course, this doesn't suggest that characters not listed in this table are not Chinese characters. However, we strongly suggest that registries do not permit registration of Chinese characters that are not in these tables. These tables will be updated or extended in the future if necessary. 3.2. Chinese Domain Name Label (CDNL) If an IDN label includes at least one Chinese character then this label is called a Chinese Domain Name (CDN) Label. CDN labels may contain characters from the traditional letter-digit-hyphen (LDH) set as well as Chinese characters. 3.3. Simplified Chinese Variant Table (SCVT) A language table for Simplified Chinese has been defined based on rules defined in [RFC3743]. Its key characteristic is that the preferred variant is the SC character that is used by Mainland China users or defined in Chinese related standards. 3.4. Traditional Chinese Variant Table (TCVT) Similarly, a language table has been defined for Traditional Chinese. It is also based on the rules of [RFC3743}. The preferred variant is the TC character, which is used in Taiwan or defined in related standards. 3.5. Original Chinese Domain Name Label (OCDNL) The CDNL that users submit for registration. LEE, et al. Expires February 23, 2006 [Page 5] Internet-Draft Guideline for Chinese Domain Names Aug. 2005 4. Procedure for CDNLs registration This document use the same procedure for CDNLs registration as the one defined in section 3.2.3 of [RFC3743]. Because the first column of SCVT is same as the first column of TCVT, the third column of SCVT and the third column of TCVT are the same too, so the CV(IN, ZH-CN) will be same as the CV(IN, ZH-TW) after Step 3; The PV(IN, ZH-CN) is SC form, and the PV(IN, ZH-TW) is TW form. After this algorithm, not more than three records, including OCDNL, SC form and TC form, are added into zone file. The set of languages associated with IN is both ZH-CN and ZH-TW by default. The procedure for CDNLs registration uses the registry- defined rules, which may be different for different registries supporting CDNs, for optional processing. The motivation for such rules is described below. The preferred variant(s) is/are TC in TCVT, and SC in SCVT. There may be more than one preferred variant for a given valid character. In actuality, while IDNA, and hence [RFC3743], look at characters one at a time, the actual relationship between the valid code point and the preferred variant is contextual: whether one character can be substituted for another depends on the characters with which it is associated in a label or, more generally, in a phrase. In particular, some of the preferred variants make no sense in combination with other characters, and therefore those combinations should not be added into the Zone file as ZV. It would be possible to define and implement rules to reduce the preferred variant labels to only those that are plausible. This could be done, for example, with some artificial intelligence tools, or with feedback from the registrant, or with selection based on frequency of occurrence in other texts. To illustrate one possibility, we could require that the OCDNL is TC-only or SC-only, and if there are more than one preferred variants, we could use the OCDNL as the PV, instead of PV produced by the algorithm. To emphasize, the tables in [LVT-CN] and [LVT-TW] follow the table format and terminologies defined in [RFC3743]. If you intend to implement Chinese domain names registration based on these two tables or ones similar to them, a complete understanding of [RFC3743] is needed for the proper use of those tables. LEE, et al. Expires February 23, 2006 [Page 6] Internet-Draft Guideline for Chinese Domain Names Aug. 2005 5. Security Considerations This document is subject to the same security considerations as [RFC3743], which defines the table formats and operations. As with that base document, part of its intent is to reduce the security problems that might be caused by confusion among characters with similar appearances or meanings. While it will not introduce any additional security issues, additional registration restrictions such as those outlined in section 3 may further help reduce potential problems. LEE, et al. Expires February 23, 2006 [Page 7] Internet-Draft Guideline for Chinese Domain Names Aug. 2005 6. Acknowledgements Thanks for these person's suggestions, promotions and efforts on such tough work: WANG YanFeng, Ai-Chin LU, Shian-Shyong TSENG, QIAN HuaLin, and Li-Ming TSENG. Especially, thanks Joe ZHANG and XiaoMing WANG for their outstanding contributions on SCVT in [LVT-CN]. And also thanks Kenny Huang, Zheng-Wei Lin, Shi-Xiong Tseng, Lie-Neng Wu, Cheng-Wu Pan, Lin-Mei Wei, Qi-Qing Hsu for their efforts and contributions on editing the TCVT in [LVT-TW]. These experts provided basic materials, or gave very important suggestions and principles to accomplish these two variant tables. And that, the authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of those who commented and make suggestions on this document, including James SENG, and other JET members. 7. References [LVT-CN] LEE, X. and H. QIAN, ".CN Chinese Character Table", IANA IDN Languages Tables, March 2005. [LVT-TW] LU, A., ".TW Traditional Chinese Character Table", IANA IDN Languages Tables, March 2005. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC3490] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello, "Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)", RFC 3490, March 2003. [RFC3491] Hoffman, P. and M. Blanchet, "Nameprep: A Stringprep Profile for Internationalized Domain Names (IDN)", RFC 3491, March 2003. [RFC3492] Costello, A., "Punycode: A Bootstring encoding of Unicode for Internationalized Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)", RFC 3492, March 2003. [RFC3743] KONISHI, K., HUANG, K., QIAN, H., and Y. KO, "Joint Engineering Team (JET) Guidelines for Internationalized Domain Names (IDN) Registration and Administration for Chinese, Japanese, and Korean", RFC 3743, April 2004. LEE, et al. Expires February 23, 2006 [Page 8] Internet-Draft Guideline for Chinese Domain Names Aug. 2005 Authors' Addresses LEE Xiaodong CNNIC, No.4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun Beijing 100080 Phone: +86 10 58813020 Email: lee@cnnic.cn URI: http://www.cnnic.cn Erin CHEN TWNIC, 4F-2, No. 9, Sec. 2, Roosevelt Rd. Taipei 100 Phone: +886 2 23411313 Email: erin@twnic.net.tw URI: http://www.twnic.net.tw John C Klensin 1770 Massachusetts Ave, #322 Cambridge, MA 02140 USA Phone: +1 617 491 5735 Email: john+ietf@jck.com Nai-Wen HSU TWNIC, 4F-2, No. 9, Sec. 2, Roosevelt Rd. Taipei 100 Phone: +886 2 23411313 Email: snw@twnic.net.tw URI: http://www.twnic.net.tw MAO Wei CNNIC, No.4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun Beijing 100080 Phone: +86 10 58813055 Email: mao@cnnic.cn URI: http://www.cnnic.cn LEE, et al. Expires February 23, 2006 [Page 9] Internet-Draft Guideline for Chinese Domain Names Aug. 2005 Intellectual Property Statement The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. Disclaimer of Validity This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. Acknowledgment Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society. LEE, et al. Expires February 23, 2006 [Page 10]