RFC 6927: Variants in Second-Level Names Registered in Top-Level Domains
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Internationalized Domain Names for Applications (IDNA) provides a method to map a subset of names written in Unicode into the DNS. Because of Unicode decisions, appearance, language and writing system conventions, and historical reasons, it often has been asserted that there is more than one way to write what competent readers and writers think of as the same host name; these different ways of writing are often called "variants". (The authors note that there are many conflicting definitions for the term "variant" in the IDNA community.) This document surveys the approaches that top-level domains have taken to the registration and provisioning of domain names that have variants. This document is not a product of the IETF, does not propose any method to make variants work "correctly", and is not an introduction to internationalization or IDNA.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6927
- Published
- May 2013
- Authors
- J. Levine; P. Hoffman
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- INDEPENDENT
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 18
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 7085Top-Level Domains That Are Already DotlessCurrent
December 2013
- RFC 7314Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS) EXPIRE OptionCurrent
July 2014
- RFC 7958DNSSEC Trust Anchor Publication for the Root ZoneObsoleted
August 2016
- RFC 9199Considerations for Large Authoritative DNS Server OperatorsCurrent
March 2022
- RFC 3696Application Techniques for Checking and Transformation of NamesCurrent
February 2004
- RFC 6975Signaling Cryptographic Algorithm Understanding in DNS Security Extensions (DNSSEC)Current
July 2013
- RFC 6844DNS Certification Authority Authorization (CAA) Resource RecordObsoleted
January 2013
- RFC 6841A Framework for DNSSEC Policies and DNSSEC Practice StatementsCurrent
January 2013
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?