[art] Re: [SPICE] Re: Re: [Last-Call] Re: Re: Re: draft-ietf-spice-glue-id-04 ietf last call Artart review

[Rohan Mahy <[e-mail]>]

Hi,
I think you are confusing an Authority Identifier (which identifies the
authority generating the business identifier), and the rest of the URN.

I was recommending an IDN as a possible name for an Authority.

thanks,
-rohan

On Sat, 14 Feb 2026, 11:47 Arnt Gulbrandsen, <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Rohan Mahy <[e-mail]> writes:
>
> > I think there are three questions that follow from this
> > discussion: - do we want national/regional identifier systems to
> > be registered?
>
> Indeed.
>
> > - do we want to allow or encourage internationalized domain
> > names for the names of any non-ASCII Authority Identifiers? If
> > so, punycode is a logical way to represent them.
>
> I would _guess_ that a string derived from a registered company
> name is more likely. Less fleeting, less easily reregistered.
>
> BTW, I don't think John meant to suggest domain names. Rather, he
> told the story due to the possible parallels. Some countries
> introduced non-ASCII domain names without asking the IETF for
> permission, which led to IETF defining a common way to do
> non-ASCII domain names.
>
> > - is it the responsibility of the GLUE spec to define how
> > non-ASCII characters (if any) are represented in the rest of the
> > URN (after the Authority Identifier and colon), or should that
> > be left to the individual registrations?
>
> And that's where the IDN story has a parallel.
>
> I'd add a fourth: is ASCII really necessary, or is it better to
> restrict it to, say A-Z0-9 or just 0-9. AFAICT the initial
> registrations don't need more than 0-9, or what have I missed?
>
> So the arguments to accept code points like 0x20, 0x22, 0x25, 0x3b
> seem weak to my untutored eyes. Of course this:that:";drop table
> users is great fun.
>
> Arnt
>