Nicolas.Williams at oracle.com
Tue Jun 15 23:48:44 CEST 2010
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 11:45:38PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams at oracle.com> writes:
> >> It isn't clear from the writeup, but this code has been shipping in GNU
> >> Libc for many years, so if you are running GNU/Linux chances are you
> >> have had this functionality for quite some time. You can test it
> >> through a code snippet like this:
> > Ah, it's good to know that this is shipping.
> > I think it might be a good idea to add AI_NO_IDN and AI_CANON_NO_IDN
> > flags. That way in the future we could change these functions to behave
> > by default as if the application had used AI_IDN/AI_CANONIDN.
> > I can see the default behavior of getaddrinfo()/getnameinfo() being
> > configurable system-wide, at least initially until we obtain enough
> > deployment experience. Specifically, I'd like to see what, if anything,
> > breaks if getaddrinfo()/getnameinfo() act as if the application had used
> > AI_IDN/AI_CANONIDN; I suspect there will be very little breakage, and if
> > that's so then I think we can stand to get much more benefit from having
> > that be the default behavior than from it being optional.
> That could be tried in an experiment, but I believe any effort to make
> that the default, or even any effort to standardize anything here,
> should be co-ordinated with the Austin group. That is also really the
> place where the POSIX experts hang out and can tell whether this is a
> good idea or not, from a POSIX standardization point of view.
Certainly making it a default should be, but making it configurable,
> I recall raising this with them in the past, but it was premature at
> that point. Perhaps now is a better time.
It's getting painfully necessary, IMO.
More information about the Idna-update