[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idn-idna-08.txt
"Adam M. Costello" wrote:
> There is a rule that *requires* the ASCII form to be used in all legacy
> protocols and data types, and that rule explicitly overrides the rule
> about hiding ACEs from users.
> IDNA does not recommend altering protocols or data types in any way; it
> recommends altering user interfaces. That is what the text you quoted
> is doing.
The delineation between transport and display data is normally clear
within a single constrained function or service. The problems occur when
display data is used to feed another function. The only way that we can
reduce these risks is for the specification to take the safest, most
conservative stance -- no default conversions -- and then let the
authoritative bodies implement overrides when they know it will be safe,
or where *they* are willing to risk any problems which may result from a
looser stance. It is beyond the authority of this WG to impose these risks
on the rest of the Internet community.
I don't expect this to get changed by this team, but I am obligated to go
on record with my concerns again.
> A Stringprep profile suitable for use with domain names would have to be
> equivalent to Nameprep-followed-by-additional-prohibitions.
The profiles do not have to be subsets of nameprep. Case variance and
character variance are both likely to occur.
Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/