-On [20120226 21:11], Stephane Bortzmeyer ([email protected]) wrote: >Note that it is a direct violation of RFC 5892. U+1F4A9, being of >category So, should be DISALLOWED. The registry was wrong to accept >it.
Oh, this will be fun. So I guess they did not check the codepoint categories in their validation step then? (I honestly have no idea how NICs do this nowadays, it's been ages since I messed with stuff on that level.) -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai イェルーン ラウフロック ヴァン デル ウェルヴェン http://www.in-nomine.org/ | GPG: 2EAC625B Is this all there is of me..?
