Re: [idn] IDN refocus, v4

["James Seng/Personal" <jseng@pobox.org.sg>]

>   1) Define an internationalized domain name and host name syntax
>      for compliant protocols and applications to use.
>
>      [ ] yes
>      [ ] no

It become more apparent that it is dangerous to into the discussion of
internationalized domain names vs internationalized host names. Such
discussion is half-technical and half-policy and this group may not have
sufficient information to determined what is a considered a valid
hostname, and that is subjective to registries.

>   2) Define a seven-bit label encoding that legacy protocols and
>      applications can use to store and represent i18n domain names
>      as defined data.
>
>      [ ] yes
>      [ ] no
>
>   3) Define an UTF-8 label encoding that BCP18-compliant protocols
>      and applications can use to store and represent i18n domain
>      names as defined data.
>
>      [ ] yes
>      [ ] no

(2) & (3) are solution-focus statement. And neither have rough consensus
nor sufficient fact. I think we should put a scope around this and not
specify any solution.

Define an IDN label encoding that protocols and applcations can used to
store and represent i18n domain names.

>   4) Provide proposals to DNSEXT for handling these label encodings
>      in the DNS service.
>
>      [ ] yes
>      [ ] no

Longer term goal maybe.

>   5) Provide guidelines for the protocol and data-formatting groups
>      to use when they extend their services to tag, store, decipher
>      and/or display (as necessary) these encodings.
>
>      [ ] yes
>      [ ] no

Care to explain a bit more?

> I would also suggest that any further attempts by interested third
parties
> to redefine the charter without a vote be summarily rejected.

We dont do vote in IETF.

-James Seng