Re: [idn] length restrictions on IDN label

["James Seng" <jseng@pobox.org.sg>]

> >>(incidently, UTF-8 encoded string which looks like domain name is
> >>not a domain name)
>
> I cant' agree on your parenthesized claims.  Please look into IDNA draft
> sections which mention utf8 encoding as alternative encoding  for labels
in
> applications and future protocols and even in future DNS protocols.

Adam has already answered you on this.

"Yes, but labels in DNS containing octets >= 128 are not
internationalized labels, because internationalized labels use only
octets <= 127 in DNS.  Labels in DNS containing octets >= 128 are
mysterious creatures that have no standard interpretation as text
(because ASCII is the only text encoding used by the DNS standard)."

Therefore, a UTF-8 string which was somehow squeeze into the DNS packet has
no meaning right now.

IDNA do not ignore the possibility of using UTF-8 in DNS Packet. But the use
is yet to be defined. Until it is defined, it is useless to discuss that
possibility.

> As a novice IETF pariticpant, I have little experience with DNSEXT WG.
> Would  Area Directors make comment on this issue, Erik ?

I think even a novice participiant like yourself would know better to lookup
the the DNSEXT yourself then to bother ADs with such little nitpicks.

http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/dnsext-charter.html

"Issues surrounding the operation of DNS, recommendations concerning the
configuration of DNS servers, and other issues with the use of the protocol
are out of this Working Group's charter. These issues are considered in
other venues, such as operational issues in the DNS Operations Working
Group."

So bring your problem of label length (which I am not very sure what you
arguing...expand? reduce?) and propose a solution for that in DNSEXT.

Alternatively, you can look at some of the past proposal which utilized
UTF-8 and EDNS. One of them (the one written by Marc) allows about 255 UTF-8
octet and considering getting the authors resubmit them again to the DNSEXT
WG.

Of course, you may continue to talk about the confusion of the label length
limit here. But it will do you no good especially it seem that you are the
only one who is confused.

-James Seng