Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed
"James Seng" <jseng@pobox.org.sg> Wed, 11 September 2002 15:27 UTC
Received: from psg.com (smmsp@psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA12972 for <idn-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Sep 2002 11:27:25 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from lserv by psg.com with local (Exim 3.36 #1) id 17p9Hj-00004O-00 for idn-data@psg.com; Wed, 11 Sep 2002 08:20:07 -0700
Received: from sentosa.post1.com ([202.27.17.100]) by psg.com with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 17p9HZ-000029-00 for idn@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 11 Sep 2002 08:19:57 -0700
Received: (qmail 58908 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2002 15:24:28 -0000
Received: from bb-203-125-81-120.singnet.com.sg (HELO JAMESSONYVAIO) (203.125.81.120) by sentosa.post1.com with SMTP; 11 Sep 2002 15:24:28 -0000
Message-ID: <04cf01c259a6$a5fa6950$4d00a8c0@JAMESSONYVAIO>
From: James Seng <jseng@pobox.org.sg>
To: IETF idn working group <idn@ops.ietf.org>, "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
References: <20020911003630.GD13791@nicemice.net> <43751462.1031652652@localhost> <20020910210100.GA13791@nicemice.net> <23210641.1031682991@localhost> <20020911003630.GD13791@nicemice.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20020911112139.00a66760@mail.jefsey.com>
Subject: Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 23:19:39 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0 tests=DOUBLE_CAPSWORD, PORN_10, PORN_3 version=2.31
X-Spam-Level: **
Sender: owner-idn@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
What you described (at least the technical part) is quite different from IDNA so it should not be mixed up with IDNA. Since you are a probably new to the IETF process (see RFC 2026), let me repeat the same thing I told others: The best way to proceed is to document your proposal in an internet draft and submit it to the IETF. Only then could we have a proper discussion of the proposal. You may also want to look at some other drafts the group have seen. Particulary, John's dnssearch. -James Seng ----- Original Message ----- From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com> To: "IETF idn working group" <idn@ops.ietf.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 9:49 PM Subject: Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed > Gentlemen, > I have discussed here the IDNA issue. I have related with Adam Costello on > the list and off list and I thank him for that. I have heard the different > remarks of many. I will now tell you how I will document and implement my > axcess engine system "IDNA" support. > > I offer that to permit an analysis on a real project. I do not expect to be > criticized on religious/theoretical grounds but to be helped towards a > better end-user and OPES support, in a way creating the minimum discrepancy > or no discrepancy with the standard you propose. > > I do this because I fight for my own business survival in a real > international world, not as a corporate manager or a distinguished > academic. I only possibly paid by real customers with real users. > > My premises: > > > 1. I live for 25 years (1977) in the international data communications > world. I always made my money there for ma family, except since I came into > the IP world. I still accept it as a long investment period. > > > 2. Since the very beginning I am involved with the international namespace > (INS). It interconnected in 1984 with DNS (there are some differences in > perspectives quoted by John Klensin who was not involved here by then but > has a command of the Internet history. Probably because of the time flow, > and because when you build a gateway there is by nature a male and female > perceptions). This is of low interest. What is of interest is the > experience: we must take advantage from the pros of both sides and avoid > the cons of both sides (I understand that is what he means). This gives me > an unique experience about the way the real world behaves; and some more > intuitive knowledge of the needs and constraints than those who related on > the matter with Govs, operators, market, corporates, law makers, end users, > local tech support, end-application developers. Sorry to quote that: it is > only to explain why I suppose this mail might be of use. > > > 3. for 20 years the only thing which really worked and made the "Internet" > in most people minds is the DNS part of the namespace. The reasons why it > works is because it is stable, simple and most of all consistent with > intuitive addressing feeling. > > I co-created the namespace in a form which developed all over the world,. > But with a semantic which would NOT have had the same impact as the DNS. > > We started with the root names, then from LEFT to RIGHT (as in a sorts, > disk directories etc.) we permitted operators to add hostname as an > extension, then sub-hosts. We created the hierarchy, but it was a mess. > > Because we had no zone (as in IP addresses). What the DNS brought was to > respond intuitively to the need of the users in sorting out clearly that > mess. The reversing from right to left at the gateway and the use of the > "." as a reversing indicator did it all. RFC 920 the "prefix" of the time > was the suffix ".arpa". > (When you start with an unique thing you start with two: it and not it. Two > is by nature a family and a family grows). > > It did it all, because the resulting addressing logic was brainware > consistent with postal addressing and EDI rules. Country last. And you can > keep adding details first. Like on an envelope the name (e-mail name) comes > first (and as in the "vielle France" etiquette: the use the "@" [at the > proper "à Monsieur," place] as it was created for this in Middle-Age (@ is > latin "ad"). This means a brainware consistent system with an habitus of > more than 8 centuries. > > We kept BOTH system working. We interfaced a few people to ARPA in right to > left hierarchy and supported in left to right the numeric names X121 > hierarchy. From 1982 to 1986 I carried the same task as IDNA - but the > other way : instead of expanding from 38 characters to billions, I reduced > from 36 to 10. For the same public. > > From experience, the reason why it worked (IMHO) is that we adapted to the > least able technology. We were using names and had to support digital only > addresses. We used "numeric names". But we had all the capacities of the > names, so when Transpac was only using an IP-address like scheme , we had > the flexibility of a complete real time, flexible and powerful database. So > we proposed value added services but not a new system. > > I think the only way IDNA can succeed is the same way. Unicode is the > powerful system: DNS is the less powerful one. I am an seaman: the speed of > a convoy is the speed of the slowest vessel less the zig-zags. IDNA must be > considered as a DNS service, subject to the constants of a dual system. > > IDNA can only be DNS value added, not as an alternative system, even > embedded.. The only alternative system would be to study, specify, develop, > experiment a new DNS. IMHO it cannot be done in two minutes (IMO it will > take years and due to the political implications that it is a big, big task > ahead which will involved 190 countries universities, Telcos, Govs, > communities). I also think it cannot be done one shot. This is why I > suggest to look into DNS.2 (improving stabilizing the system, its > operational architecture, its political insertion, etc... in compatible way > with the current DNS - I do not even know if we need to increase the > character set). This is why I also work on top of it on extended DNS > services, like IDNA, authetification, access engines, etc (DNS+). This is > the rational of the Dot-Root proposition ( http://dot-root.com ) still in > infancy and only partly documented in English. But with gaining interest. > > So I only consider serious and conform use of the DNS: the rule and the > bible. Errors/tricks in using it are of no concern to me. Errors and tricks > do not make the basis for a rule (this is a basis of the Roman Law and of > social life). > > There is a hierarchy of the addressing information. That hierarchy is > necessary to get the next info. There is no use to know an ASCII or Unicode > the forename of someone if you do not know the name, the city and the > country. The way you write that information does not make it different. > > Question: are there existing additional hierarchies in postal (brainware) > addressing? ie something the mailman need to chose between different mail > destination - and or mail path? > > - not the title (Mr, Mrs, Dr, M. Mme, Snr, M.M., Her, Esq. etc...) > - not the type of information: a nickname is accepted as long as the layer > below accepts it. I mean than "Jack" is accepted for "John" in an Irish > family and "Jefsey Morfin" will be accepted in the "Morfin" mailbox. > - partly the service : is it a hierarchy/an added information in the naming > hierarchy? Postal Services all over the world use "Port Payé" or "Port du". > The same as all the DNS Managers use "MX". The routing: "AirMail" or > "ParAvion". (note: these hierarchies are not in naming. They are used when > applying before or in parallel to the routing). > - the scripting is an intuitive (real) hierarchy: is the scripting local to > the sender, to the sendee or international scripting? Usually only > international and sendee scriptings are accepted. The place where the > discrimination is carried is the first point where a scripting is not > understood anymore. In some cases it can go beyond through an alternative > path: in adding "c/o some go-between" who will translate. > > > 4. access engine. To understand the way I am going to use IDNA+, and why, > one has to understand the access engine concept. I name and develop "access > engines" DNS resolvers which use an extended resolution strategy. For > example my domain name is http://utel.net . There is no access engine > implemented there, but http://jefsey.morfin.utel.net could accept the call > as the default for utel.net and resolve the 3 and 4LD as > jefsey.morfin.utel.net, morfin.jefsey, jefsey, morfin, vacations etc... > > This kind of OPES provides a directory service but also an easy ULD (upper > level domains) management system in using LDAP like system or more advanced > directory solutions, etc... > > This means that I have no problem to introduce transparently punnycode > support in my existing names. http://U+xxxU+yyyyU+zzzz.utel.net are OK. > > The access engine resolves in two ways. Either as a reroute or as a normal > DNS server. This depends on the economics and on the user system > architecture. They are transparent. http://jefsey.utel.net can resolve one > day as a reroute to http://jefsey.com and the next day as a CNAME for > http://jefsey.com. I note that the test for a French application supports > 1.500.000 names with a target for 150.000.000, with some added value > variations (abbreviations, accents,e ct) what corresponds to billions of > names. The DNS could not support all this, but provide a stable, simple, > existing support for the ULDs. > > These access names are either free or cheap and will be legally enforced > one day (we will support the national IDs, immotic telemates, etc). We > cannot plan to spend much energy to support billions of names for millions > of people. > > Obviously these names must be transparent to different accepted writings: > upper, lower, accentuated cases. "eleve" must be bijective with "élève". > > That engine can to some extend accept the most common typos and the > sound-alike wording. But it will not easily accept that a French "O" is > replaced by a Greek "o". > > > 5. legal issues. Due to the IETF current lack of documentation between the > software domain name as an alphanumeric pointer to an IP address, and the > brainware mnemonic cannonic/alias to a domain name, there are out of > context laws/jurisprudence such as ACPA, Whois, etc. we must live with. > > I do not want to run into endless UDRPs and "a la Joe Sims" contractual > issues because a Chinese way to write something will print on all the > French non-IDNA displays and printers as "iesg-ibm.fr" or as a racist text. > > Not a minute nor single penny to spend helping other to understand if what > will legally counts is one or the other formula. > > > Now the "Jefsey's solution". > > 6. From all this (and other economy, marketing, social etc... points) my > implementation and explanation will be as follows. > > a) there is an unique DNS naming sequence. That sequence utilizes the > International Domain Names System Character set, named "IDNScode". Today > IDNScode includes 0-9, A-Z dash and dot. Nothing prevents it to be extended > by the DNS designers. > > b) the extended-Unicode set (e-Unicode) includes the current Unicode > version plus the current IDNScode version.. > > c) the support of natural Internet names is organized through specialized > sub-domains the charter of which defines the e-Unicode supported sub-set, > and the bijective e-Unicode/IDNScode reading/writing function. Their ULD > (upper level domain) will be of the form ".prefix--suffix.tld", where > > - prefix indicates the conversion system > - the suffix indicate the used e-Unicode restriction. > > The prefix will be the "iesg--" prefix for the IDNA system. The null suffix > will default to "IDNScode". > > d) registrations will use current NIC management systems with a > transwritting using a punnycode routine after a sub-namespace character filter. > > e) abbreviated name presentation will be supported to possibly hide/insert > the script sub-domain. This will be insured by "prefix--suffix" loaded or > embedded plug-ins (on the system) or as OPESes. > > > Discussion > > > 7. I will use the French name "élève" (pupil) fro this discussion, since it > is supported by my keyboard and should probably be by all of yours. > > a) support of international registration by AFNIC : http://eleve.fr > > b) support of the French registration by AFNIC: > - uppercase scripting : http://ELEVE.FR - existing as http://eleve.fr > - accentuated lower case : http://élève.iesg--fr.fr > entered also as : > - http://eleve.fr (decision to be taken by AFNIC to comply with > French law) > - http://eleve.iesg--fr.fr (until the IDNScode == Unicode) > > c) update of the e-Unicode character set > - one shot ^parallel registration of the new scripting equivalent > - management of the possible conflicts > - de registration of the obsolete e-Unicode scripts once every user > supports the new version. > > d) work to be done to support this service > - creation of the "iesg--fr" domain name > - adding of a French character set list in the Punnycode C code. > - delay to the market: 24 hours after the release of the "iesg--" > characters. > > e) user implementation > - this is transparent to the current situation > - e-Unicode support can be provided by who wants and different natural > character sets can be implemented depending on the user keyboard. > > f) legal implications > - none > - the e-Unicode scripting is by nature 3+LD names outside of the WIPO > area of influence. > - jurisprudence will develop probably on brainware mnemonic second > level, but it should be related to the documented good, rather than a good > by itself. if the good is the domain name: the standard UDRP apply on the > registered DNS entry: nothing changed. If it applies on any other good: > domain names are not even only more considered as such. > > g) extensibility > - there is no addition to the DNS which can be as freely extended as before > - there is an unlimited extension of the natural character set through > the suffix. There an unlimited capacity of extension on the processes > through the prefix. There is a quasi unlimited capacity of extension though > another semantics. > > h) load > - the load forecast on the DNS imposed by current IETF proposition may > be tremendous a TLD may become a new worldwide ".com" with hundred of > millions of entries, on the whim of a fashion. The sub-domain approach > obviously permits the transparent load of billions of Internet names. > - however the load shifts towards the sub-domain information management > within the work frame of the new loads imposed on the root server system > and on the DNS. This load is to be considered all together with the load > imposed by Microsoft's "dynamical" DNS management, portables, DNS lookup > leaks, racing multiple root calls for speed of some resolvers, ENUM > support, security concerns etc.. > > > > Summary. > > The whole Recommendation is that the Internet Community agrees that a > domain name including a double dash "--" means a domain name which can been > hidden/created by applications should the corresponding set of recursive > processes (defined by its charter) it describes, have been applied. > > > Some examples: > > - iesg-- : this domain specializes in IDNScode scripts > - iesg-fr this domain specializes in "French names". > - fm-- : this domain specializes in telephone follow-me services > - iesg--fm-fr : this domain specializes in telephone follow-me services in > French accentuated names. > - enum--fr: enum names tel://139500510.enum--.fr > - tel--fr: enum through french name names : tel://eleve.tel--fr.fr entered > on my mobile as "éléve.fr" that may be transcoded into tel://eleve.fr, > tel://élève.tel--.fr.fr http://eleve.iesg-tel--fr etc. depending on the > services organized by the operator. > > > I certainly accept that it is rather different from the current wording and > concerns. But I think it is compatible. I hope it may help. I will keep > posting on the implementation ... as I find the funding. > > jfc > > > > > > >
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Eric A. Hall
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed James Seng
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed JFC (Jefsey) Morfin
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed John C Klensin
- [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed (was: Re… John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Erik Nordmark
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Erik Nordmark
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Erik Nordmark
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Erik Nordmark
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Soobok Lee
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Erik Nordmark
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Erik Nordmark
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Soobok Lee
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] Figuring out what can be displayed Soobok Lee