[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] NSI whitepaper on ML Resolution
From: Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [idn] NSI whitepaper on ML Resolution
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 10:18:48 -0800
> No, they will according to the paper primarilly use ACE, and secondly
> use UTF-8, and have a CNAME from the UTF-8 to the ACE.
>
> I have talked orally with VGRS people here in San Diego, and pointed
> out the difference from the report we got from the Protocol Design
> Team at the IDN wg meeting. I further said that using CNAME is
> probably not a good thing.
I think CNAME is not good either. There are too many restrictions on the
aliases. And that cause alias can't be used as well as the canonical name
So I think at least, current usage of CNAME is not enough to be used in
this way, I think. And I also think why we need to relate one domain name
to another. I mean why not just let one name to equal to another? Such as,
A "EQUAL TO" B
Maybe I should explain what I want to say more clearly. I mean maybe in the
future, a new relation among the names will be required, and maybe it will
be the "=". Then there is no more primary name, secondary name.
# I don't mean to use inverse query here.
The thinking above just a thinking at all, not a proposal or suggestion.
Thanks a lot!
Hongbo