I really agree with Dongman Lee that we should
understand the long term solution before rushing into an intermediate
fix/hack.
About what happens to 8bit requests as they get
sent, I have been urging that we should do some kind of study, at least to let
everyone know what will happen if these DNS packets are forced through from, say
a common application such as the browser, through the OS kernel. Cause
even if we use ACE, these requests will be sent via non-compliant browsers to
affect the system.
To that end, I have finally put together a bunch of
hand notes that we have been collecting about the "known issues" for
multilingual domain names. Please take a look and comment on it and
add to it too. http://www.openidn.org/issues.html
Dongman, do you have any studies on the effects of
8bit requests sent via other applications or OS?
Edmon
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 6:32
AM
Subject: [idn] Re: Re: [idn] San Diego
Meeting Notes
I don't think it's a right approach focusing on a
short term solution without clear understaning/evaluation on what a long
term solution would be. Moreover, the proposed decision should be made after
thorough analysis of possible problems when non-ACE is used (e.g. UTF-8) which
I suggested at the San Diego meeting.
Dongman Lee
> >
> -----¿øº»¸Þ½ÃÁö----- > º¸³½»ç¶÷: "James Seng/Personal"
> ¹Þ´Â»ç¶÷: idn@ops.ietf.org > ³¯Â¥:
2001/01/24(¼ö)06:38 > Á¦¸ñ: Re: [idn] San Diego Meeting Notes >
> Dear all, > > I would like to re-emphasis a few
'consensus' in the meeting in San > Diego. > > a)
Requirements I-D to move to Last Call after last minor edition. >
> b) Strawpoll agrees with Protocol Design Team recommendation to
focus > on "ACE on Application" now but do not rejecting a longer
term > solution in future. > > c) Strawpoll agrees that the
Nameprep Design Team is working in the > right direction. (See
Nameprep-02) > > If you have any objection (I know a few of you
do), please raise them > now. > > If there is no major
objection, then the next step would include > > 1. Zita will do
the Requirements -04 and we will move to Last Call. > > 2.
Protocol Design Team (or someone) should start working on writing > an
I-D for the IDN Protocol. As it stands now, IDNA seem the closest > we
have. > > 3. An ACE Design Team may be form to investigate what
is the correct > ACE to use for (2). > > In additional, I
would also like to propose to update the Goals and > Milestone section
of the WG Charter to reflect our progress more > accurately. >
> Your comments would be appreciated. > > -James
Seng > > > > > > >
|