LDH-label terminology

Eric Brunner-Williams ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net
Sat Jul 26 20:19:14 CEST 2008

> ...
> In another article you mentioned RFC 2673 for the difference
> between "binary" and "octets".  IMHO we can ignore RFC 2673
> for IDN.  The SPF folks also ignored it for RFC 4408 back in
> 2005.
> ...

If you think the SPF requirement wasn't octet-aligned, and the unit of 
store two or more contiguous allocations of 8 bits, then your opinion is 

If you think the IDN requirement is both octet-aligned, and the unit of 
store necessarily 8 bits, for all label types, then your opinion is very 

Look, I don't much care, other than to have suggested that the taxonomy 
of labels of type data could be consistent with 2929, and that text 
labels are a proper subset of binary labels. I don't much care that the 
binary label experiment didn't pan out better, its just a data type to 
be correct about, or gloss over because <insert reason here>.

There was a reason the 4408 authors ignored anything other than 
single-byte characters, they weren't wrestling with u-labels.

Oh well.

More information about the Idna-update mailing list