Re: [idn] proposed i18n naming rules

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

What we need to do is defined U+3002 as a DNS label seperator
*inadditional* to U+002E. We should also consider U+FF2E to be
consistent.

-James Seng

----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric A. Hall" <ehall@ehsco.com>
To: "ben" <ben@cc-www.com>
Cc: "liana Ye" <liana.ydisg@juno.com>; <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 1:45 AM
Subject: Re: [idn] proposed i18n naming rules


>
> ben wrote:
>
> > It was first brought up by Eric H in this thread who said, " U+002E
> > (FULL STOP) is ONLY valid for use as a separator when the IHI is
> > written out".  I thought it will be a good time to draw the same
> > attention to the "Chinese Full Stop" for this WG to consider.
>
> DNS doesn't store the separator. The only place the separator appears
is
> in domain names that are written-out and stored in data streams. And
since
> the separators are not encapsulated in the labels (they are separators
not
> data), they are not subject to encoding, and therefore would always
appear
> between encoded labels (including ACE labels). So really you are
asking
> about domain names as they appear in protocol and/or application data.
You
> would have to update every protocol and application that processes
domain
> names in order for Chinese Full Stop to be usable as a label separator
> everywhere that a domain name was encoded or encapsulated.
>
> --
> Eric A. Hall
http://www.ehsco.com/
> Internet Core Protocols
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/
>