Exploring IDN Bundling Practices: A Comparative Analysis of Canada's Approach and Global Trends

05 May 2024 | By Michael D'Rosario

Internationalised Domain Names (IDNs) are an essential innovation in creating a more linguistically inclusive and accessible internet. While many countries and registries support IDNs, Canada’s .CA domain stands out for its unique bundling policy, which automatically reserves all IDN variants of a domain for the same registrant. This approach has implications for security, inclusivity, and domain management, distinguishing it from the practices of most other regions. This article analyses Canada’s IDN bundling strategy, compares it with global practices, and explores the reasons why bundling remains an exception rather than the rule.

Canada’s Bundling Policy: A Pioneer in IDN Management

The Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) adopted an innovative bundling policy when implementing IDNs for .CA domains. This system automatically reserves all linguistic or script variants of a registered domain name for the same registrant. For example, registering example.ca also reserves éxample.ca and other variations that incorporate diacritical marks.

Key Features of Canada’s Bundling Policy:

1. Automatic Reservation: Upon registration of a .CA domain, all possible IDN variants are tied to the registrant and cannot be claimed by others.

2. Single Registrar Rule: All reserved and registered variants must be managed under the same registrar and registrant, simplifying domain administration.

3. Cost Parity: The cost of registering a bundle is the same as registering a single ASCII domain, making the process financially accessible.

4. Optional Activation: Registrants can choose whether to activate individual variants, giving them flexibility while retaining exclusive rights to all.

Canada’s policy ensures that businesses, organisations, and individuals can maintain a consistent and secure digital presence across multiple linguistic variants of their domain. This proactive approach also addresses security concerns, such as phishing and domain squatting, which are often associated with IDNs.

Global Practices: A Comparative Analysis of IDN Policies

While many countries support IDNs, the practice of bundling variants under a single registration is uncommon. Instead, registrants are typically required to register each variant separately, with no guarantee of exclusivity. The table below summarises IDN practices in various countries, highlighting how they handle linguistic diversity and bundling.

Country	ccTLD	Script Support	Bundling Policy	Implication
Germany	.DE	Latin script with umlauts (ä, ö, ü)	No bundling; each variant is treated as a separate domain.	Registrants must proactively register each variant to maintain brand consistency.
China	.CN	Simplified and traditional Chinese characters	Variants are managed and linked but not automatically reserved for a single registrant.	Registrants need to register each relevant variant to secure their digital identity.
Russia	.РФ	Cyrillic script; .RU for Latin script	No bundling; Cyrillic and Latin domains are independent registrations.	Both versions must be registered independently to ensure brand protection across scripts.
Japan	.JP	Japanese characters and Latin script	No bundling; each linguistic variant is treated as a separate domain.	Registrants must register each desired variant to secure their brand in different languages.
South Korea	.KR	Hangul (Korean script) and Latin script	No bundling; Hangul and Latin domains require separate registrations.	To maintain brand integrity, both Hangul and Latin versions should be registered.
Saudi Arabia	.السعودية	Arabic script; .SA for Latin script	No bundling; Arabic and Latin domains are independent registrations.	Organisations must register both Arabic and Latin domains for comprehensive brand coverage.
Egypt	.مصر	Arabic script; .EG for Latin script	No bundling; each script requires a separate registration.	Registrants should secure both Arabic and Latin versions for full online presence.
India	.IN	Multiple scripts (e.g., Devanagari, Tamil)	No bundling; each script variant must be registered separately.	Registrants need to register each variant independently to ensure comprehensive linguistic representation.
Greece	.GR	Greek and Latin scripts	No bundling; Greek and Latin script domains are separate registrations.	Both script versions should be registered to maintain consistency and protect brands.
Thailand	.TH	Thai script and Latin script	No bundling; Thai and Latin domains require separate registrations.	Registrants must secure both Thai and Latin domains to protect their digital identity.
Canada (exception)	.CA	Latin script with diacritical marks (é, â, ç)	Bundling implemented; all linguistic and script variants are automatically reserved for a single registrant.	Simplifies domain management, reduces phishing risks, and ensures brand protection.

IDN Bundling Remains Rare

Most registries support IDNs but treat linguistic variants as separate entities, requiring registrants to actively secure each variation. This approach increases the administrative burden for registrants and leaves them vulnerable to domain squatting or phishing attacks. Canada’s bundling policy is a significant outlier, providing a streamlined and secure solution that prioritises user convenience and inclusivity. It is important to clarify, however, that while all IDN variants are automatically reserved at no additional cost, activating any of these reserved variants requires a separate registration. Once activated, each variant enters its own standard registration and renewal lifecycle, including applicable fees. Thus, while the bundling policy promotes cost accessibility and administrative simplicity by ensuring exclusive reservation, any operational use of an IDN variant entails obligations associated with domain management.

Despite its clear benefits, bundling remains an uncommon practice among registries worldwide. This is due to several factors, including operational complexity, market demand, financial and technical barriers, cultural diversity, and a lack of global standardisation.

Lessons from Canada for Global Adoption

Canada’s approach offers valuable lessons for registries looking to improve IDN management. By prioritising security and inclusivity, simplifying registration processes, enhancing brand protection, and offering cost-effective bundling options, registries can create systems that balance user needs with operational feasibility. These lessons are particularly relevant for regions with high linguistic diversity or where IDN adoption has been slow.

Conclusions

Canada’s .CA bundling policy exemplifies how registries can proactively address the challenges associated with IDNs while promoting linguistic inclusivity and security. Integrating these lessons into global practices can foster a more inclusive and secure internet, ensuring that linguistic diversity is celebrated rather than marginalised in the digital age. For regions considering their IDN policies, Canada’s approach serves as a model worth emulating.