Re: [idn] Document Status?

["Soobok Lee" <lsb@postel.co.kr>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Crocker" <dhc@dcrocker.net>
 > All of your note is devoted to very nice description of concepts and 
> principles.  However you do not describe any networking technical scenarios 
> that will fail.
> 
> IDNA is networking standard.
> 
 
IDNA does not extend the LDH namespace, but just redefine xx--yyy subset of
the space to have new i18n meanings.  They are ASCII domain names that are declared
as displayable in other scripts. networking scenarios around IDNA are the same to
those of ASCII domains, in principle. IDNA may work well with DNS and SMTP networking. 
But with others ones or new ones to come, it would make another obstacles to optimal
i18n of protocols works.

Moreover, all the mess around i18n which does not belong
to "network standard" , was not addressed and just postponed or ignored.
To be usable, security issues and interoperabilsy issues in applications should be 
addressed in IDN standards because IDN will penetrate to all the applications as soon
as we issue some drafts and a few vendors begin to support IDN.
backwards compatiblity consideration wrt networking seems not enough from
the angle of how to fullfull the need for which we try to provide i18n'ed protocols
to end users.

Networking is not enough. Applications' need matters.

Soobok Lee