"Brian W. Spolarich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. IDNA/ACE/Nameprep now and forever;
> 2. IDNA/ACE/Nameprep now and UTF-8 later (either direct, new class,
> or EDNS);
> 3. IDNA/ACE/Nameprep now and jck's directory service later;
> 4. jck's directory service now;
> 5. UTF-8 now and forever (either direct, new class, or over EDNS).
6. Both IDNA/ACE/Nameprep and UTF-8/Nameprep now and forever, and maybe
a directory service later in addition.
That is, a protocol may use ACE or UTF-8 or both, depending on the
needs of that protocol. For existing protocols like DNS and email, ACE
will be easier to deploy (UTF-8 alternatives could also be developed,
though it's not clear whether they'd offer much added value). For new
protocols UTF-8 will be simpler. Library interfaces could be encouraged
to work with UTF-8 and/or the local charset, regardless of the encoding
on the wire.
AMC
