> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of Edmon > Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 8:12 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Paul Hoffman / IMC > Subject: Re: [idn] Unicode tagging > > > At 11:30 AM -0400 8/16/00, Edmon wrote: > > >uniform byte-length characters are extremely beneficial to DNS and we > should > > >try to preserve it in the protocol. > > > > Could you elaborate on why this is true? In the applications that > > mandate using UTF-8, no one has been unable to implement it. > > > > The reason as I have indicated is the need to have a character count. I don't see any technical reason for this. We probably do need an upper limit for the number of octets on the wire. > > Edmon > >
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Paul Hoffman / IMC
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Keith Moore
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Edmon
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Keith Moore
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging James Seng
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Randy Bush
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Keith Moore
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Edmon
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Keith Moore
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Edmon
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Jonathan Rosenne
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Paul Hoffman / IMC
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging A. Vine
- RE: [idn] Unicode tagging Dan Oscarsson
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Keith Moore
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Dan Oscarsson
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging James Seng
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Keith Moore
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Mark Davis
- Re: [idn] Unicode tagging Dan Oscarsson
