Re: [idn] Determining equivalence in Unicode DNS names

["James Seng/Personal" <jseng@pobox.org.sg>]

Stuart,

Since you just join the list, you may want to take a look at our website
and the mailing list archives at http://www.i-d-n.net/

The points you raised (and it is valid) have been discussed before which
is partially answered in Nameprep. It is one dead horse we need not whip
again.

The use of DNAME as a solution was also discussed before. It is a
solution that is neither accepted nor rejected by the WG.

-James Seng

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stuart Cheshire" <cheshire@apple.com>
To: "Dave Crocker" <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Cc: <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 8:01 AM
Subject: Re: [idn] Determining equivalence in Unicode DNS names


>In other words, the task of IDN is entirely solvable,
>as long as we do not define the task to be too broad.

I can see how my statement could be misinterpreted, so please allow me
to
clarify.

I did not mean to say that IDN cannot succeed. I'm quite sure that IDN
can and will succeed.

What I meant to say is not solvable, is the task of defining a single
set
of Unicode equivalence rules that is appropriate in every culture in
every country around the world. It may simply be the case that under UK
trademark law the names Pépsi and Pepsi are deemed to be same, while
under French trademark law they are deemed to be quite different. (That
may be a terrible example; if so I apologize, and welcome a better
example of a case where different cultures have different rules of name
equivalence.)

Hence my question was whether DNAME might provide an answer, to free IDN
from the equivalence debate, by allowing equivalence to be determined
locally on a per-zone basis.

Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com>
 * Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Computer
 * Chairman, IETF ZEROCONF
 * www.stuartcheshire.org