comments on draft-ietf-idnabis-bidi

[Alireza Saleh]

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> When integrating comments into text, some additional notes....
>
>
>   
>>> 12) The next sentence says: "In a domain name consisting of only 
>>> LDH-labels and labels that pass the test, the requirements of Section 
>>> 3 are satisfied as long as a label that starts with an ASCII digit 
>>> does not come after a right-to-left label that ends in a digit."
>>> This is not true.  See example b above.
>>>     
>>>       
>> You are right. This needs to be documented; I did not test this case.
>>   
>>     
> I changed the sentence to say "the requirements of Section
>
> 3 are satisfied as long as a label that starts with an ASCII digit 
> does not come after a right-to-left label" - I think this is true for all cases.
>   
I think we came to the consensus during the Dublin meeting that IDNABIS 
working group should stay within the scope of labels and it shouldn't do 
the intra-label checking.Bringing the new concept ( intra label checking 
)  for domains will put registries into trouble.
If the working group decides to do the intra-label checking then we can 
think about some more complex rules such as : if a domain starts with 
AL, then some of the current restrictions can be ignored however, I 
think we can change the paragraph  which discusses about prohibition of 
mixing the AN and EN characters in a label to something like  " AN and 
EN cannot be mixed within a label if the labels doesn't start with AL " .

I would also recommend the removal of the text from bidi that talks 
about label uniqueness, the text itself reduces the accuracy of the 
protocol and it may cause some inconsistency, as Harald mentioned during 
the IETF meeting , they have a script that tests all possible cases and 
those problematic cases have been already resolved by some accurate 
rules, so if in the future we understand that something is missing, then 
an explicit rule regarding them should be  added to the protocol. The 
label uniqueness  can also be moved to rationale document to cover all 
cases including homographs.


Alireza