Re: [idn] Internationalized PTR draft submitted

[Rick H Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>]

James,

I understand now, but I realy don't see the utility of localization of
i18n names in refrence to PTR records.

Since you have the names in utf8 just display the i18m name, of cource
some client's users might not understand the script, but I don't think we
need to engineer new PTR records just to solve a UI issue.

For instance what do you do when I want the arabic representation and one
is not available?

let me state that I am definately opposing IPTR and all encodings that
hint of embeding language in hostnames.

-rick

On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, James Seng wrote:

> Rick,
> 
> No, I am not referring to charset. I actually mean *language* in this context.
> The charset could be in UTF-8 (or whatever we decide). I think you still
> havent understand the purpose of the draft but you got sidetracked when you
> see the word "language".
> 
> Let me give you an example.
> 
> 4.3.2.1.in-addr.arpa  IPTR  zh-tw "traditional-chinese xxx.com in utf8"
>                       IPTR  zh-cn "simplified-chinese xxx.com in utf8"
>                       IPTR  ja    "japanese xxx.com in utf8"
>                       IPTR  ko    "korean xxx.com in utf8"
> 
> All 4 RR are xxx.com but in *different* translation. The charset used is
> UTF-8. The language here is different. Different clients would then choose the
> most appropriate IPTR RR to use as they see fit. (Whether you like it or not,
> clients do have locale.)
> 
> On the other hand, I am also wondering would IPTR be useful actually
> considering we have language tag on Plane 14. Hence, it is possible to do 
> 
> 4.3.2.1.in-addr.arpa  PTR  "traditional-chinese tag + xxx.com in utf8"
>                       PTR  "simplified-chinese tag + xxx.com in utf8"
>                       PTR  "japanese tag + xxx.com in utf8"
>                       PTR  "korean tag + xxx.com in utf8"
> 
> which would achieve the same thing as what IPTR is trying to do.
> 
> Once again, let me state that I am not endorsing this method nor am I
> opposing. 
> 
> -James Seng
> 
> Rick H Wesson wrote:
> > why are you on this language bent? If we have UTF-16 which represents
> > *all* languages why do we need a "tag" which can't be enforced to let us
> > know what language the name is in. In fact the name could be in many
> > languages.
> > 
> > Lets banish the term language in this group, you obviously mean charset and
> > thinking that I only want the Japanese IDN for an Arabic name is useless.
> > Lets just understand that localization of PTR records isn't going to happn
> > with i18n names.
> > 
> > -rick
> > 
> > On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, James Seng wrote:
> > 
> > > PTR has a failing which IPTR attempts to address, ie, locale info (language
> > > info).
> > >
> > > So a Japanese application may choose the Japanese IDN for the IP and the
> > > Korean application may choose the Korean IDN for the IP. How useful it is
> > > subjected to debate of cos.
> > >
> > > -James Seng
> > >
> > > Randy Bush wrote:
> > > >
> > > > multiple names for one ip is a red herring (idiom for something which
> > > > distracts one from the proper path).
> > > >
> > > > 666.42.7.1.in-addr.arpa.    PTR  my.dom.ain.
> > > >                             PTR  another.dom.ain.
> > > >                             PTR  yet.another.name.
> > > >
> > > > is perfectly legal and in common use.
> > > >
> > > > randy
> > >
>