[idn] DNS is just one of many protocols that use domain names

["Adam M. Costello" <idn.amc+0@nicemice.net.RemoveThisWord>]

C C Magnus Gustavsson <mag@lysator.liu.se> wrote:

> We could consider wiping the slate clean and design a new protocol.
> Let's call it e g INS (for Internet Name System or International Names
> System) to distinguish it from DNS...

Edmon Chung <edmon@neteka.com> wrote:

> Is not ACE just an ugly mask slapped on to the DNS...
>
> Why cant we go both routes and layout a roadmap for an eventual
> convergence with a protocol change that utilizes 8bit data?

You are both focusing too much on DNS.  DNS is just one of many
protocols that carries domain names.  Others include SMTP, RFC 822,
IMAP, HTTP, URIs, SSL certificates, and on and on...  The problem of how
to stuff non-ASCII characters into domain names applies equally to every
protocol that uses domain names; DNS isn't really that special.  Making
DNS accomodate non-ASCII characters in domain names doesn't solve the
problem for any other protocol.  Each one would need to be updated.

And the harder part of the problem is not how to preserve the
characters, but how to compare the labels: knowing that e-with-acute
is the same as e followed by combining-acute.  Simply making protocols
8-bit clean doesn't give you that.

> Is not ACE just an ugly mask slapped on to the DNS to allow clients
> to fake out the user in that they are getting a multilingual domain
> name, but in fact, all they got from the DNS operators is a string of
> uninteligible ASCII characters?

Yes!  (Except that it can be slapped onto any protocol, not just DNS.)

> Cause now we are saying that (for the following example imagine,
> xx--ace = a multilingual label <ML>)
> - xx--ace is NOT really xx--ace as you see it, but it really is <ML>
> - OR <ML> is the same as xx--ace

It's the latter: <ML> is the same as xx-ace (they are equivalent domain
labels).

> Either way, it means that we have fundamentally changed the concept of
> a "unique" DNS name.

It's not a fundamental change.  Even now, foo and Foo and FOO are
equivalent labels, even though they are not identical strings.  Software
needs to be slightly clever when comparing labels for equivalence.  IDNA
does not introduce a fundamental change, but merely an evolutionary one:
the cleverness needed to compare IDN labels is greater, because now <ML>
and xx--ace are equivalent, but it's the same fundamental concept.

> So what do you tell the customer they got?  An ASCII String? or a
> Multilingual Domain name?  Or do you say its a Buy one Get one Free?!

I'm sure registrars will put all sorts of marketing spin on it, but I'd
say you got one domain name which can be represented by a variety of
strings, some of which are ASCII-only and some of which aren't.

AMC