Re: [idn] Reality Check

["Adam M. Costello" <amc@cs.berkeley.edu>]

Edmon <edmon@neteka.com> wrote:

> Do you think it is appropriate therefore that there be a mechanism
> whereby an application can choose to use either the UTF8 or ACE form
> of an IDN depending on the compliancy of the destination server?

The application does not talk to the DNS server.  The application talks
to the resolver, and the resolver talks to the DNS server.  The DNS
protocol matters to servers and resolvers, but not applications.  (Am I
wrong about this?  Are there applications that speak DNS directly?  More
than a negligible number of them?)

> This ensures that once the other components or protocols become UTF8
> compliant, the DNS will not be stuck with ACE.

I have no objection to defining a UTF-8 extension for DNS, but I don't
see how it will have much impact on applications, and I certainly
don't see any urgency.  IDN deployment can commence as soon as IDNA is
finalized and approved, while the DNS extension can be rolled out soon
after, or much later, with the same chance of success either way.

Perhaps the people focused on the DNS protocol should redirect their
attention to the resolver API, because that's where you can help
applications.  This API is already being changed to support IPv6 (see
RFC 2553), so I'd suggest coordinating with that effort.

AMC