Re: [idn] Re: 7 bits forever!

["Edmon Chung" <edmon@neteka.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric A. Hall" <ehall@ehsco.com>
> There are multiple "clients" in the process. The application client
> shouldn't have to mess with fallback unless there is a really good reason
> for it (a cache being unable to convert an ACE-only DNSSEC answer being
> one of them). In those cases, an EDNS RCODE is a workable way to tell the
> application that the original query needs to be reissued in ACE form if it
> wants an answer.

I meant the application client.  That is right.

> For other situations, such as circumnavigating old servers which only
> support ACE-ified i18n domain names, letting a resolving/caching server do
> the convolutions makes some sense, since those boxes can cache the
> canonical UCS answer and referral data, which will help future queries.

However, there is advantage for not having the nameservers do any ACEing.
It should make the phasing out of ACE faster.

> I guess what I'm saying is that forcing the application client to pick up
> resolver and caching duties doesn't make a lot of sense to me personally
> since it will preclude the benefits of caching data.

But we are anticipating that this be a "transitional" phase only.
Eventually, IDN/EDNS will be common place.

Edmon