Stability of valid IDN labels
vint at google.com
Tue Apr 22 21:00:23 CEST 2008
with regard to requirements, I think what is emerging from the
IDNAbis process has origin less in ICANN than in IETF and Unicode and
linguistic experts trying to produce a set of rules that will
maximize utility in DNS of non-Latin scripts while protecting against
a number of risks perceived by the working group participants.
thoughtful discussion on this list and within the earlier design team
list is the source of "requirement" in large measure and I hope that
we can continue to harvest this as we work towards consensus in the
On Apr 22, 2008, at 2:40 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> Of course the first thing I did was google for "+unicode +u+1E9F",
> and observed that it is upper-case, and therefore, in itself, of
> little inate relevance to the DNS, where the broad rule is "case
> fold where case exists".
> It is however, an instance of requirements agency that is outside
> of the scope of this WG, assuming that this WG's requirements
> originate from the institutions I mentioned yesterday -- broadly --
> ICANN and little else, except perhaps some DNS registry operators
> as an additional set of authors.
> I'm glad you're going to get a site administrator to look into the
> final issue Frank identified, as there is a historic issue with
> using texts which are only conditionally available. Its been ages
> since I last spent time on IETF process, but I'm sure someone on
> this list has the current cite.
> Mark Davis wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:43 AM, Frank Ellermann
>> <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz at gmail.com
>> <mailto:hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> John C Klensin wrote:
>> > To say this a little differently, such changes in Unicode are
>> > not made in secret, but involve opportunities for public
>> > discussion. It is reasonable to assume that the negative
>> > effects on IDNs of making such changes would be part of the
>> > relevant discussions.
>> I'm far from sure how reasonable that is: The introduction of
>> u+1E9E was discussed in public, but decided by a third party
>> not interested in its effects on the Internet, let alone IDN.
>> For those who (perhaps unlike Frank) have not memorized the code
>> points of all characters, this is the *CAPITAL SHARP S.*
>> While of course Unicode can't be limited to just characters that
>> work in IDN, this particular change -- and the ramifications for
>> security and compatibility -- it was discussed at great length
>> over the course of many meetings. It was encoded largely at the
>> request of the German national body.
>> Moreover, there is little issue that the form occurs in documents,
>> nor that it is not the preferred capitalization.
>> The Unicode list is not really public, e.g., it was removed
>> from Gmane.org later, and it is not indexed by search engines.
>> This is neither relevant nor public for practical purposes:
>> I'll ask our administrator, but you can certainly search for
>> material that is in the Unicode archives. Try:
>> Disallow: /cgi-bin/ in <http://www.unicode.org/robots.txt>
>> is about the Web interface to the Unicode list archive among
>> other things.
>> Idna-update mailing list
>> Idna-update at alvestrand.no <mailto:Idna-update at alvestrand.no>
>> Idna-update mailing list
>> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
More information about the Idna-update