Re: [idn] Why follow IDNA with UTF-8?

["Eric A. Hall" <ehall@ehsco.com>]

> For specific applications, there are natural benefits. Perhaps HTML v99
> will say "all URLs must be UTF8" just so state doesn't have to be
> maintained between browsers and servers.

Let me expand on this by saying that any application which supports
version negotiation is a candidate for UTF8 migration. NFS v99 for example
may benefit from an UTF8-only approach, and since NFS supports version
negotiation, this is feasible to implement (relying on version numbers for
fallback negotiation). LDAP v99 would be another.

The IETF is unfortunately not in the habit of mandating versioning in
their application protocols. But wherever it exists, migration is feasible
and even simple, and will offer natural benefits. Where users need ACE,
they can stay with the earlier versions.

For protocols that do not support in-line versioning, once a critical mass
is achieved and sustained (say 10 or even 20 years from now), I expect
that many implementations will default to UTF8, even if the protocol
doesn't. Look at TELNET: there aren't very many implmentations that
support Go-Ahead anymore (even though it is mandated by the protocol),
simply because there isn't much of a need for it anymore. Why would UTF8
be any different? If every SMTP client and server on the planet supports
UTF8, new implementations may implement just that, and freak out when
negotiation fails (like most of the TELNET implementations do when SGA
fails).

> So, to be clearer: please list the advantages to the end user of the
> IETF creating a protocol that doesn't use the same DNS as the rest of
> the IETF protocols.

It's not a different DNS. I don't know why you're saying that. The same
authoritative servers and the same zone data is being used. What is
different about it?

The advantages may or may not be compelling at this point. It is most
likely to simply be a matter of pragmatism when it happens (not "if" but
"when"). New protocols are already required to use ISO-10646 for charsets,
so how long will it be before the IAB simply decrees that UTF8 is the
preferred encoding as well? The ISO-10646 decree certainly wasn't driven
by user benefit, why would this one?

-- 
Eric A. Hall                                        http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols          http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/