Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>> And, under ISO 8859/1, it does not even depend,
>
> ISO 8859-1 is completely irrelevant here,
If your local encoding is ISO 8859/1, you can input 'Y', but not
'Y' with diaeresis.
If your local encoding is Unicode but you are accustomed to ISO
8859/1 environment, you will input 'Y', but not 'Y' with diaeresis.
It does not affect abstract definitions of IDNA2008 but does
affect DNS operations.
> because how you get to the
> point of having a U-label is totally out of scope for the IDNA2008
> specification.
It's totally irrelevant.
> It is certainly true that the DNS-protocol case preservation but case
> insensitivity matching rules are not internationalized exactly as one
> might like in IDNA2008. Without DNSng, I have no idea how to solve
> that.
I have no idea how it can be solved with DNSng. What is your
proposal for the DNSng?
> But you seem to be willfully ignoring that IDNA2008 actually
> does address this, although in an uncomfortable and somewhat
> unsatisfying way.
The problem is that localized domain names are not operational
at large scale at least with the current DNS.
> IDNA is shipping.
The problem is that localized domain names are not operational
at large scale at least with the current DNS.
Masataka Ohta
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
