Schanzenbach, Martin wrote on 2022-08-22 11:24:
On 22. Aug 2022, at 20:15, Paul Vixie <[email protected]> wrote:
...
noting: by describing this as a reserved name subspace, we implicitly expect that the
presentation form of any namespace thus enabled will be "compatible enough"
with DNS presentation form to allow the reservation keyword (.ALT) to be entered or
displayed, and detected. we can in the specification for the subspace reservation even
state that implication. however, if someone wants to go rogue on that, we shouldn't try
to stop them. (as if we could.)
But I also think that if it is expected that name systems may "go rogue" e.g. use a new
innovative new string encoding, then the registry might have trouble listing/registering the 2LD
"byte string" chosen by the name system?
that's not our problem. we're reserving part of the namespace, and
that's all. if someone wants to use it in a way that fails, that's
totally their affair.
So maybe Unicode provides sensible guide lines for acceptable strings under
.alt _for the registry_?
just... no. if somebody wants to put binary gibberish "under" .ALT, in a
way that browser plugins never get to see because it's not valid
unicode, that is _their problem_. we can state implications, nothing more.
--
P Vixie
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
