Re: [idn] Adding "optional" characters in draft-ietf-idn-nameprep

["Edmon" <edmon@neteka.com>]

I believe DNS means Domain Name System and not DictioNary System.  So there
really should be no attempts at determining the semantics of a name or
character for that matter.  If all semantics are taken into consideration,
as I have mentioned in my presentation in Pittsburgh, "color" should be the
same as "colour"!

I suggest that we follow the Unicode specifications and let their experts
guide us along.  The DNS could evolve as the Unicode standard evolve as
well... there is no problem with that at all.  In the mean time, that is why
David and I proposed to incorporate different encoding schemes into the DNS
because we believe that with these come well established mechanisms for
local use.  The use of local encodings will phase out as Unicode becomes
better equipped with all the requirements.  However, it is important that we
prepare for now and for the future.  Take a look at the design for the
original DNS for "class"... most of the queries today I believe are set to
the "internet class" but when it was designed, the flexibility is
incorporated and it still is.

The character restrictions that were in place for the original DNS have
created problems for migration into multilingual names and we are well aware
of it.  Today as we design the next generation system, we must keep in mind
that no characters should be ignored or rejected by the name server purely
because it contains restricted characters.  Rather the DNS should decide by
transversing the hierarchy to determine the existence of a domain.

Regulatory items should be left for registries and ICANN to decide and
arbitrate.  The DNS protocol is the platform and what we here as engineers
should be concerned.  The DNS should be robust and flexible enough to handle
any name with any known and specified character.

Edmon


> > Keith already said this during the meeting. Wires and bits don't care
> > about I18N. If we only focus ONLY on the wire format, then the DNS
> > packet are 8-bit clean already. So lets shutdown the list, go home and
> > pat yourself on your head.
>
> IETF clearly has a role to play in defining IDNs, but it's also clear
> that we don't have all of the expertise that is needed to do this right.
> So we need to find one or more other organizations that do have the
> expertise, and figure out which questions to ask them.
>
> Keith