Re: [Fwd: Re: [idn] Unicode tagging]

[RJ Atkinson <rja@inet.org>]

At 10:48 19/08/00, Keith Moore wrote:

>to put it in a different way, will it be operationally necessary
>to use MB records which contain IDNs, in order to use IPsec with
>IDNs?  or would it be possible for those MB records to contain
>only DNS names?

        I consider an IDN to be a kind of DNS name.  So I'm still 
confused by your phrasing.  In which way are "only DNS names" 
not "IDNs" in your terminology ?  What would be an example of an
"IDN" that is not a "DNS name" in a timeframe where IDNs exist ?

        I believe it is operationally necessary to have the right-hand
portion of an MB record be an IDN, in a timeframe when IDNs exist.

>does the domain of the email address in an MB record used for 
>IPsec necessarily have anything to do with the domain of the
>record itself?  or (like the addresses in SOA records) can the
>two domains be different?

        Historically, in an IPsec context, I'm only aware of MB
records where the right-hand component of the MB record was identical
with the domain that holds that MB record.  Further investigation
would be needed to determine whether that is a hard design requirement,
a practical requirement, an operational necessity, or not a requirement.
My off-the-cuff belief is that its a hard design requirement.

        The security use of MB records is NOT similar to the way
SOA records are used.

Ran
rja@inet.org