Special case for Bidi in draft-ietf-idnabis-protocol-14

[Paul Hoffman]

At 3:42 AM -0400 8/29/09, John C Klensin wrote:
> > The paragraph in section 5.4 that starts "This test may..." is
>> out of date because the rules in the Bidi document no longer
>> do inter-label checking. The whole paragraph can be removed.
>>
>> In the light of this, does the WG want to change the
>> requirement level for checking Bidi on lookup from SHOULD to
>> MUST? Given the above, I see no reason why not.
>
>I need WG input or instructions from the Chair on both of the
>suggestions above.

It would be good to hear from Harald and Cary and Mati and Alireza and any other folks who have been dealing with Bidi more seriously than I. It would be wrong for us to have a "special case" that downgrades an interoperability requirement that is not necessary.

My reading of this last part of the requirements list of 5.4 is that the only reason that it is not a MUST is that there might be special cross-label bidi considerations. I thought that those have been removed from the bidi document. I could be wrong on either of these, but if I'm right, we can simplify 5.4 in protocol by just making the last bullet a MUST like the rest of them.