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

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

vint cerf wrote

>
>what has been the practice in implementations of the various
>referenced RFCs? John's interpretation or Robert's?
>
>or has the apparent ambiguity also shown up in working
>implementations?

I know several DNS servers using non-ASCII domain names.
The Microsoft DNS servers uses UTF-8 encoded domain names
and the .NU-domain supports UTF-8, ISO 8859-1 and others
depending on what client uses.
I am sure there are more.

Using UTF-8 or ISO 8859-1 is fully compatible with the current
ASCII names as well as ISO 10646 code value compatible.

Due to the current DNS RFCs not defining how characters should
be encoded outside the ASCII range, people have selected the
best choice for their needs as seen above. It would have been
very good if the current DNS standard was updated with a RFC
stating which encoding(s) is to be used. UTF-8 or UTF-8 and ISO 8859-1
are the best choices folloging that UCS is the most common choice
for internationalisation.

    Dan