Re: [idn] Document Status?

["Eric A. Hall" <ehall@ehsco.com>]

on 9/3/2002 12:49 PM Dave Crocker wrote:

> ACE technology is the same as used for MIME.  Is MIME a transitional
> strategy?

ACE is not the same as MIME. I have avoided making this argument because
the comparison is useful for introductory purposes, but there are subtle
yet strong differences at lower levels which keep them from being mirrors.

Specifically, end-nodes typically extract data from MIME and use it within
the local context of that application *ONLY*. The encoded data is RARELY
used inside of other applications, and the extracted data is typically
used for this purpose, when needed. On the other hand, domain names are
frequently cross-populated among applications, and as the argument
regarding clipboards shows, the encoded form will be the norm.

If all Internet applications had to support the MIME encoding formats for
all of their data -- FTP offering quoted-printable as a transfer type --
then it would be equal to IDNA.

Furthermore, MIME and its constituent application protocols are being
extended so that binary data *CAN* be transferred without being encoded
first. Think about why this is so, and then ask yourself if the ability to
transfer i18n domain names in binary form would also not be desirable, for
the same kinds of reasons.

As far as that goes, an argument for MIME equality is an argument in favor
of an unencoded transfer mode.

-- 
Eric A. Hall                                        http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols          http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/