[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] Adding "optional" characters in draft-ietf-idn-nameprep
> I believe DNS means Domain Name System and not DictioNary System. So there
> really should be no attempts at determining the semantics of a name or
> character for that matter.
nobody is talking about determining the semantics of a name.
rather we are talking about how to make IDNs such that they can be
transcribed (from viewed text, voice, or memory) with minimal
chance for transcription errors.
> I suggest that we follow the Unicode specifications and let their experts
> guide us along.
Unicode doesn't completely solve the problem, nor can it. it's not
a problem of how to represent characters (that part is largely solved),
it's a problem of their being more than one way to transcribe a name
in many languages.
> The DNS could evolve as the Unicode standard evolve as
> well... there is no problem with that at all.
if the processing has to be done at the client end, it is a problem.
(it's also a problem if it has to be done at the server end, but it's
easier to upgrade the servers than the clients)
> In the mean time, that is why David and I proposed to incorporate
> different encoding schemes into the DNS because we believe that
> with these come well established mechanisms for local use.
what is "local"? users of a service often have little or no geographic
or topological proximity to the service itself. you can't expect
clients to know about the encoding scheme used by a particular server.
again, the problem isn't the ability to represent characters - unicode
solves that well enough. there's no need for a variety of character
encodings on the wire. (though it might be useful to allow them in
zone files that people edit with text editors)
> The character restrictions that were in place for the original DNS have
> created problems for migration into multilingual names and we are well aware
> of it. Today as we design the next generation system, we must keep in mind
> that no characters should be ignored or rejected by the name server purely
> because it contains restricted characters. Rather the DNS should decide by
> transversing the hierarchy to determine the existence of a domain.
nobody is talking about having the IDN protocol restrict what characters
appear - the restrictions should occur at other levels.
however that does not imply that IDN should allow arbitrary representation
of any particular character (when there's a clear need for having a canonical
form), nor that IDN should provide for arbitrary encoding schemes. (there's
no good reason to do this, it's simply bad engineering and a waste of
resources)
Keith