Re: [idn] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idn-idna-08.txt

[Dan Oscarsson <Dan.Oscarsson@trab.se>]

John C Klensin wrote:

>The disagreement between kre and myself about how to read  the
>spec is, indeed, I think the key to this issue.  It should be
>noted that we disagree about two things, which are separate:

>(ii) Whether the documents are clear or not, at least on this
>matter.  Robert believes that they are.  Perhaps we are in
>agreement -- I think they are fairly clear too, but in the other
>direction-- but that is at least the basis for a claim of
>ambiguity (or that I am an idiot, which is also a reasonable
>possibility).
>

RFC 2181 and 2929 both clearly says that the label in DNS
can include any octet value including zero.
RFC 2929 also talks about text and binary labels, the binary
label is defined in RFC 2673 so the normal label in DNS is
a text label. RFC 2929 also says that for the text label,
ASCII upper and lower case must be treated as equal.

So while RFC 1034/1035 is vague in non-ASCII octet values,
the above RFCs clearly defines that a text label can be
composed of any octet value and that for the octet
values equivalent to ASCII code values the matching
must be case insensitive (but original case should be
preserved in answers as stated by RFC 1035).

   Dan