Most spelling reform proposals for English ignore this. Many would-be reformers try to cut directly to some particular phonetic spelling scheme, which throws away a key benefit of having homophones.
Disclaimer: like many English speakers, I too have my own spelling reform scheme, with the key difference that mine is better than all the others.
It's not like English avoids words that have very separate meanings spelled and pronounced the same way.
It is not more unnecessary than any other part of the spelling reform.
Consider tho that if English is nowadays a lingua franca, we submit its learners to a lot of mental torture, including vast amounts of rote memorization of both spelling and pronunciation. English may not be quite as obnoxious as its up-and-coming main competitor, Mandarin Chinese, but it's a difference of degree not of kind. My 0,02€; YMMV.
Start with common words that are one-offs that are assertively misleadingly spelled. Lose, gross, broad, height. There are many more.
Except you can't do that. You're working on distributed legacy protocol, not some thing that you can successfully force roll-out arbitrary changes.
I think you'd have less success with your proposal than getting everyone to finally migrate to IPv6.
My original comment is in the context of spelling reform.
Think of someone lingering on a punned word to emphasize the joke, for example.