On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:07 AM, Andrew Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 08:22:22AM +0100, Måns Nilsson wrote: >> >> ...we still very much would like STD80 charset in the canonical file. > > Anything in STD80? That's kinda strange. The STD13 "rule" is > effectively the Preferred Syntax, which is LDH. Alternatively, labels > are octets. Note that there are most definitely systems that put > UTF-8 in zones, and this is entirely fine and legitimate; it just > doesn't work that well on the Internet maximally construed. > >> Non-ASCII characters then probably should be encoded using IDNA. > > Perhaps here you mean, "labels should be IDNA-conformant"? If so, > underscore labels are out, and that seems like it'd suck.
As I said earlier, I think that "labels in domain names should be encoded in Punycode" would be sufficient, and would eliminate your problem with _labels, I believe. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
