Wwhich RFCs the new work would obsolete, vs update or leave alone

Marcos Sanz/Denic sanz at denic.de
Thu Mar 20 16:25:54 CET 2008

> > Similarly, we should remove Nameprep from the list of documents that
> > are obsoleted unless we are sure that there are no other RFCs that
> > rely on Nameprep. If we are sure nothing else relies on Nameprep
> > (unless it is also relying on IDNA2003 in general), we can keep
> > Nameprep on the list of things to be obsoleted.
> I did a quick scan:


> * RFC 5144 reference nameprep.  Perhaps it should have referenced just
>   IDNA; similar to RFC 4018.

RFC 3982 is missing from your list. And I don't think that 3982 or 5144 
are exactly similar to the 4018 case, since they are IRIS profiles with a 
domain name slot to carry the "normalized" form of the IDN (that is, after 
Nameprep). They could maybe have got away with 
ToUnicode(ToASCII(domainname)) instead of Nameprep(domainname), modulo the 
few subtle well-known differences.

Best regards and happy Easter (where applicable),

More information about the Idna-update mailing list