On 3/1/10 5:12 PM, John R. Levine wrote: >> in theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. >> in practice, there's interoperability testing... >> > I'd think more conformance than interop, since I'd be surprised if there > were any ambiguity about the correct way to encode UTF-8 into punycode. > There remains issues related to DNS conversion for code predating RFC 5242, which can lead to different results. UTF-8 in email is used to accommodate IDNs per RFC 5336. Uncertain conversions represent justifications for finding ways to replicate zones in order to establish name equivalency. It takes many years for code to find stability, where IDN is within a transitional phase.
As a side note, the tpa-label scheme could accommodate "equivalent" and "alt-name" validations, such as those related to ADSP, in addition to the authorizing of mailing-lists that remains an open issue. -Doug _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
