Will reverting DNS wildcard have any adverse affects?

Mon Oct 6 20:45:29 UTC 2003

* joel at jml.net (Joel Rowbottom) [Mon 06 Oct 2003, 22:34 CEST]:
> At 15:52 06/10/2003, Piotr KUCHARSKI wrote:
> 
>>>> do arbitrary changes to them. Marking "com" and "net" as 
>>>> delegation-only is not harming anything. (At least until ICANN changes
>>>> its mind.)
>>> According to this mail:
>>> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/registrars/msg00532.html
>>> ... apparently it breaks IDN resolution.  Does anybody have the
>>> definite word on that?
>> Hm. And how would it suppose to break IDN resolution? Client encodes
>> the hostname, then asks the DNS about already encoded name. So the bind
>> receives the request about, say, "xn--szkoagwnahandlowa-lyb21mca.pl".
> I don't think Niels was referring to the "proper" IDN solution, but
> more the stopgap implementation which Verisign pushed into service.
> It actually resembles Sitefinder in many ways :/

I only referred to the archived registrars mailing list posting; I'm not
following IDN much as, even though it's nice to see actual work being
done in that area, it does smell of VeriSign landgrab.

I'm interested in what has also broken due to the rash wildcard addition
by Verisign.  If anybody has any more technical information on this,
please step forward.

Regards,

	-- Niels.