Re: [dns-dir] idnabis documents in the iesg
Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com> Wed, 06 January 2010 13:58 UTC
Return-Path: <ajs@shinkuro.com>
X-Original-To: dns-dir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dns-dir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC4933A6818 for <dns-dir@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 05:58:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.833
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.833 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.234, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cWIuptI2wGCt for <dns-dir@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 05:58:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C18F03A67FE for <dns-dir@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 05:58:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from crankycanuck.ca (69-196-144-230.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F1B72FE8CA1 for <dns-dir@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:58:55 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:58:53 -0500
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com>
To: dns-dir@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20100106135853.GI8857@shinkuro.com>
References: <4B444C57.4050105@piuha.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <4B444C57.4050105@piuha.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Subject: Re: [dns-dir] idnabis documents in the iesg
X-BeenThere: dns-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNS directorate discussion list <dns-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-dir>, <mailto:dns-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dns-dir>
List-Post: <mailto:dns-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dns-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-dir>, <mailto:dns-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 13:58:58 -0000
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 09:39:51AM +0100, Jari Arkko wrote: > Directorate, > > These documents are on the IESG telechat tomorrow. I would like to get > your assessment on whether they are ready to become RFCs or if there are > some significant issues left. > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idnabis-bidi-06 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idnabis-defs-12 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idnabis-protocol-17 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idnabis-rationale-15 > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idnabis-tables-08 I reviewed the documents during WGLC, and have been active in the IDNABIS WG. I haven't completely re-read the documents after the LC, but I've followed the changes as they've happened. The hold up with them since IETF LC has been, apparently, the sponsoring AD's reluctance to proceed because of issues to do with the fact that these introduce backwards-incompatible changes with IDNA2003. The resolution to that has, in the end, apparently been to say, "Yes, they do," and to hope that sensible things will happen elsewhere. There were some adjustments to the documents, but nothing that wasn't there all along in my opinion. The compromise appears to have been that the issue of how to handle the transition has been kicked over to ICANN. The plain fact is that these introduce a backward-incompatible change with IDNA2003, and that there will therefore be an overlap period during which it will be possible for two different clients on the same machine at the same time to resolve the same keyboard input differently. The most galvanizing but maybe not most likely example of this is the ß (Eszett or SHARP S) character. In order to avoid this eventuality, it will be necessary for registries (or zone operators) to do something to map the characters in question, and to arrange the zones they operate such that during some transition period at least there is no difficulty. Of course, there isn't anything in the protocol to enforce this, and it would be impossible to require that there be. In my opinion, given the aims that the IETF had when chartering the IDNABIS work in the first place, the documents are as good as they're ever going to be and should be published. Remember that these are at the beginning of the standards track, and there's already some talk of opening them to revise and advance. Best, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@shinkuro.com Shinkuro, Inc.
- [dns-dir] idnabis documents in the iesg Jari Arkko
- Re: [dns-dir] idnabis documents in the iesg Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [dns-dir] idnabis documents in the iesg Patrik Fältström