[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: General internationalization
- To: idn@ops.ietf.org
- Subject: RE: General internationalization
- From: Andrew Draper <ADRAPER@altera.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 02:51:47 -0800
- Cc: "'Paul Hoffman / IMC'" <phoffman@imc.org>
- Delivery-date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 02:48:41 -0800
- Envelope-to: idn-data@psg.com
> 2.2 Internationalization (I18N)
>
> Internationalized characters must be allowed to be represented and
used
> in DNS names and records.
> This is good.
> Implementation must specify what character
> sets are used and how these characters are encoded in the DNS names
> and records.
> This is bad. I strongly disagree that there is a *requirement* for
> multiple character sets or encodings. Those who feel that this is a
> requirement should say why it is so. I believe that adding
> "All" to the
> beginning of the first sentence is sufficient.
Agree (with the modified first sentance). Perhaps a better second sentance
would be:
If multiple character sets are used then the protocol must make it obvious
which character set is being used for each protocol element. Alternatively
the protocol could use a single wide character set.
> This document does not define any character sets that should be used
> for I18N. However, non-standard character sets must not be used to
> avoid duplicate work on general I18N. If multiple character sets are
> used, they must be clearly identified.
> Same disagreement.
Agree. We should not presuppose that the protocol will use multiple
character sets.
> The DNS protocol should remain deterministic. No DNS
> element (resolver,
> network, server or zonefile) should be required to do guess work.
> I do not see why "network" or "zonefile" is here; they are inherently
> not capable of doing guesswork. I'm not sure I even like
> "server" here.
> I fully agree that resolvers should not have to do any guessing.
Agree that network should not be present. The zonefile comment is badly
expressed. What I meant it to mean was that if a server allows zonefiles to
be defined in multiple character sets then the character set of a zonefile
should be deterministic. Of course, given a sufficiently intelligent server
zonefiles can be in multiple character sets independent of whether the wire
protocol uses a single character set or multiple character sets.
Is this requirement so obvious that it should be removed?
> Must allow I18C in DNS RR response.
> I don't know what an "RR response" is.
Resource Record response. I think this is intended to mean things like PTR
which return labels.
> Must allow I18C in DNS TXT records.
> I don't think I agree with this since it has nothing to do
> with domain names.
Not sure I agree with this either. Many people are putting binary data into
TXT records - this requirement would break that. Suggest instead:
"Must provide a record which can contain internationalised text (similar to
TXT)."
Of course whether to do this or not is entirely independent of putting
internationalised characters into DNS labels.
[more stuff snipped]
Andy