James;
As you could have seen, on IETF mailing list, Harald and I have, at
least, agreed that, if you use unicode based encoding, local context
(or locale) must be carried out of band
Few will disagree (including me) that using Unicode to do localization is
almost impossible without
Few will disagree (including me) that using Unicode to do localization
is
almost impossible without locale context.
Huh? No one said such a thing.
What is agreed is that, to use unicode, it must be supplied out of
band local context.
In that case, I disagree with to use unicode, it must
You want to be facing 8-bit bugs in 2002? I recommend reconsideration
of priorities.
--
James W. Meritt CISSP, CISA
Booz | Allen | Hamilton
phone: (410) 684-6566
Aaron Falk wrote:
I think one can make the case that having border protection may
prevent a DOS attack from consuming interior network resources and
allowing interior hosts to communicate amongst themselves.
And if your interior network resources are less than 10x your external
resource, you
From: Tony Hain [EMAIL PROTECTED]
it may be more convenient to have the border deal with DOS, but is it
*required* as Noel asserted?
First, there's good idea, required, and *required*. It's *required*
that your computer have a test-and-branch instruction to be a Turing machine.
An underlying question we must ask ourselves from all the discussions that
have sprung up every now and then is:
Do we wish to
1. eventually move the DNS towards UTF8/16 OR
2. do we want to stay with ASCII(ACE) for the rest of our lives?
If the answer is 1. then the IDN solution should take it
Unicode is not usable in international context.
...
It would not be worth replying to these threadworn and repeated
assertions by Mr. Ohta, except that some members of this list may not
be that familiar with Unicode. Clearly Unicode is being used
successfully in a huge variety of products in
[Note: IDN WG list removed]
As you could have seen, on IETF mailing list, Harald and I have, at
least, agreed that, if you use unicode based encoding, local context
(or locale) must be carried out of band
Few will disagree (including me) that using Unicode to do localization is
almost
On Mar 19, D. J. Bernstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Go sell a Greek user an ``internationalized domain name'' with a delta,
Pete. Then tell him that most of his correspondents will see the delta
as incomprehensible gobbledygook rather than a delta. See what he says.
Okay, I'm not Greek,
Date:Thu, 21 Mar 2002 00:57:18 +0859 ()
From:Masataka Ohta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Otha-san
| Anyway, with the fix, there is no reason to prefer Unicode-based
| local character sets, which is not widely used today, than existing
| local
As a frequent visitor to Japan, I am planning to put together some kind of
guide and put it on a web page somewhere, more on that later.
Meanwhile, please mark your calendar for:
1. Akihabara (electronics town) Geek Tour, Sunday July 14. On Sundays, the
Main Drag aka Chuo Dori is closed to
Do we wish to
1. eventually move the DNS towards UTF8/16 OR
2. do we want to stay with ASCII(ACE) for the rest of our lives?
it's a false dichotomy.
first, there are probably some purposes for which identifiers
(including DNS names) should stay ASCII (and not even 10646
encoded as
Provably false: well-coded applications know the limitations of domain
names, and do not even attempt to make requests for non-ASCII names.
First of all, I disagree with the well-coded part because I believe a
well-coded application will do the dns request as is and allow the dns
response to
John Stracke writes:
For that matter, a well-designed application will not even make it
possible to enter anything but ASCII in an input field (whatever) for a
domain name.
That's incredibly bad design.
You're violating the basic principles of information hiding articulated
by Parnas in
Keith Moore writes:
IDNA is designed to maximize the rate at which IDNs can be deployed.
I hereby declare that cs.utk.edu is an IDN. We will now spend twenty
years trying to convince all application programs to display it as the
international picture of an ostrich with his head in the sand.
On Thursday, March 21, 2002, at 06:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, there is the possibility that if they were totally honest,
and marketed their devices as Enabling appliances for selected Internet
services that they'd STILL make money (and then you'd have no one to
blame).
Please
16 matches
Mail list logo
