Re: [idn] length restrictions on IDN label

[Soobok Lee <lsb@postel.co.kr>]

Then,
 U+AC00 x 56 times (in my previous posting)  is a valid label  
conforming to RFC1035 ?
  and its equivalent ACE label (of  63 octets ) is a valid label ?

  UTF8-encoded IDN labels are not governed by RFC1035 length restrictions ?
  IDNA contains  brand new length restrictions for 8bit labels   which 
obsoletes RFC1035 ?

  Soobok Lee

Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:

> At 10:54 AM +0900 10/14/02, Soobok Lee wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 09:39:42AM -0700, Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
> >  > It seems likely that most implementers can understand that they must
> >
> > >  continue to follow the same rules that they always have for the
> >  > length of domain names and labels.
> >
> > The unit of length restriction matters: # of code points or # of 
> > octets ?
> > That should be made clearer. RFC1035 uses "octets", not a 
> > character/code point.
>
> Exactly right. It seems like you have answered your own question!
>
> In case I'm missing something, where in any of the IDN documents does 
> it indicate that the length restrictions are in number of code points 
> instead of number of octets?
>
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --Internet Mail Consortium