[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [idn]

"JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com> wrote:

> As you say IDNA is only a mechanism.  It may apply to any semantic
> made of labels linked by dots.  I also feel there are several issues
> related to the specific use of the names.  In removing references
> to the usage of the names, we would have a stable universal system.
> Special adaptations for particular uses, if there are some, would be
> understood as particular cases.

It sounds like you're talking about "domain names".  The DNS standard
makes it clear that domain names can be used for an arbitrary variety
of purposes.  The only thing they all have in common is their syntax:
sequence of labels, ASCII, case-insensitivity, and the size limits.
(Labels are customarily separated by dots, but not always.  For example,
not in DNS protocol messages.)

The IDNA spec defines a mechanism for arbitrary domain names, regardless
of what they are naming or what protocols they are used in.

> >    Existing DNS servers do not know the IDNA rules for handling
> >    non-ASCII forms of IDNs, and therefore need to be shielded from
> >    them.  All existing channels through which names can enter a
> >    DNS server database (for example, master files [STD13] and DNS
> >    update messages [RFC2136]) are IDN-unaware because they predate
> >    IDNA, and therefore requirement 2 of section 3.1 of this document
> >    provides the needed shielding, by ensuring that internationalized
> >    domain names entering DNS server databases through such channels
> >    have already been converted to their equivalent ASCII forms.
>
> But is it that complex?

Yes, it is that simple.  :)

> One year from now most will ask themselves about "existing": are there
> changes?

I cannot predict what new channels might appear in the future.
Obviously, you can't stuff data in format X into a program that is
unaware of format X and expect it to work.  If new incompatible
native-IDN channels are defined in the future, they will obviously be
intended for use with new IDN-aware DNS servers, and the specifications
of these new channels will presumably contain warnings that they can't
be used with IDN-unaware DNS servers.

> Also about "channels": are there other ways to enter the DNS?

No, "way by which to enter" and "channel through which to enter"
mean essentially the same thing.  It's just a slight difference in
connotation.

> Also, does that mean that sometime the DNS is going to become Unicode?

No.  It might, or it might not.  That's not something we need to know in
advance in order to specify and deploy IDNA now.

> I meant "DNS names character set", or any more adequate wording than
> my Frenglish, to tell "the characters authorized in ASCII domain
> names, at any given time".

It depends on more than just time, it depends on how the name is being
used.  For example, names of hosts must not contain underscores or
slashes, but names of SRV records must contain underscores, and RFC 2317
shows names of PTR records that contain slashes.

AMC