MAYBE-TRANSITIONAL, a historical tale (was: Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL)
John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com> Fri, 04 December 2009 20:40 UTC
Return-Path: <klensin@jck.com>
X-Original-To: idna-update@alvestrand.no
Delivered-To: idna-update@alvestrand.no
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2527B39E39A for <idna-update@alvestrand.no>; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 21:40:49 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 66SoMJEmePx0 for <idna-update@alvestrand.no>; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 21:40:44 +0100 (CET)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.6.8
Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E729E39E1CD for <idna-update@alvestrand.no>; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 21:40:43 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1NGexG-0004I5-7I; Fri, 04 Dec 2009 15:40:42 -0500
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 15:40:41 -0500
From: John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com>
To: Erik van der Poel <erikv@google.com>, idna-update@alvestrand.no
Subject: MAYBE-TRANSITIONAL, a historical tale (was: Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL)
Message-ID: <D9500B758C49F1B0ADFD7B78@PST.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <c07a32650912040411n5a49427lb4e83774aed9a3e2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20091203174807.GF85534@shinkuro.com> <8BC845943058D844ABFC73D2220D466508C0054D@nics-mail.sbg.nic.at> <E14011F8737B524BB564B05FF748464A044611C6@TK5EX14MBXC139.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <c07a32650912040411n5a49427lb4e83774aed9a3e2@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
X-BeenThere: idna-update@alvestrand.no
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IDNA update work <idna-update.alvestrand.no>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update>, <mailto:idna-update-request@alvestrand.no?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update>
List-Post: <mailto:idna-update@alvestrand.no>
List-Help: <mailto:idna-update-request@alvestrand.no?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update>, <mailto:idna-update-request@alvestrand.no?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:40:49 -0000
Once upon a time, not really that long ago, there was a proposal to differentiate what is now PVALID by including MAYBE YES and MAYBE NO categories. Anyone interested should try to find a copy of draft-klensin-idnabis-issues-06.txt and earlier. The general model, in today's vocabulary, was to put characters (and groups of characters) that we weren't sure about into categories that would encourage different handling on registration and looking from characters about which we were more certain, to permit later reclassification, and to arrange for controlled transitions. There was consensus for removing those categories because they made things too fragile, because they would require that all registries and applications check for updates and changes frequently (which would be too fragile), and so on. In practice, the only real difference between MAYBE and the sort of implied TRANSITIONAL you imply (or the explicit versions others have suggested) is that MAYBE would have laid out the "this is likely to change" aspect of the situation more clearly, while the idea you outline above raises all of the issues that the WG has discussed about transitions from DISALLOWED to PVALID (and decided that reclassification should require a catastrophic situation). If I remember correctly, both you and Mark were at the meeting at which the decision to drop MAYBE was made and were among those pushing for that decision, pretty much on the basis outlined above. While I don't object to revisiting that general idea -- under the identification of TRANSITIONAL or otherwise-- if the WG really feels that it wants to go there and that the old model might be worth the aggravation that caused it to be dropped the last time around, I hope that everyone does understand that TRANSITIONAL, as you and others have described it, is very close to that old and discarded idea... close enough that we might even be able to borrow text from documents that are now more than 18 months old. best, john p.s. I'm not going to comment at any length on the "global mappings" part of your proposal because I think everything has been said already. Having required global mappings is equivalent to _almost_ having U-label <-> A-label symmetry. And, of all mappings, "map to nothing" is the worst: while part of the problem with a mapping between "ß" and "ss" is that one cannot tell by looking at "ss" afterward whether the registrant intended "ss" or "ß", one at least knows that "x" or "ab" was not intended. With "map to nothing", the character that was eliminated could, in principle, have appeared in any position in any domain name label. --On Friday, December 04, 2009 04:11 -0800 Erik van der Poel <erikv@google.com> wrote: > Here is another proposal that is dead simple, yet allows > implementations to take advantage of a machine-readable file, > and does not involve "flag days" (dates at which we change > something). > > Instead of having a machine-readable file at each host, we > have two global files at iana.org. One file is similar to > Patrik's table with entries like: > > 00DF ; DISALLOWED # LATIN SMALL LETTER SHARP S > 03C2 ; DISALLOWED # GREEK SMALL LETTER FINAL SIGMA > 200C ; DISALLOWED # ZERO WIDTH NON-JOINER > 200D ; DISALLOWED # ZERO WIDTH JOINER > > There is no new value called TRANSITIONAL. The infamous 4 > characters (above) start with the value DISALLOWED. Later, we > change them to PVALID (or CONTEXTJ for 200C/200D). We > encourage ICANN to redelegate TLDs the registries of which > flout our rules. > The other file is for global mappings. Not language-specific > mappings. The format might be similar to RFC 3454's: > > 0041; 0061; Case map > 00AD; ; Map to nothing > > The absence of a character from this file means that there is > no mapping for that character. It maps to itself. The infamous >...
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL John C Klensin
- No salvation from DNSEXT (was: Additional thought… Andrew Sullivan
- Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Erik van der Poel
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Mark Davis ☕
- RE: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Alexander Mayrhofer
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Cary Karp
- RE: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Shawn Steele
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Erik van der Poel
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Erik van der Poel
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Eric Brunner-Williams
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Kim Davies
- Re: No salvation from DNSEXT (was: Additional tho… Erik van der Poel
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Erik van der Poel
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Cary Karp
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Erik van der Poel
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Erik van der Poel
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Eric Brunner-Williams
- RE: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Shawn Steele
- RE: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Shawn Steele
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Erik van der Poel
- RE: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Shawn Steele
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Erik van der Poel
- MAYBE-TRANSITIONAL, a historical tale (was: Re: A… John C Klensin
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL JFC Morfin
- Re: MAYBE-TRANSITIONAL, a historical tale (was: R… Mark Davis ☕
- RE: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Shawn Steele
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Lisa Dusseault
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL ( Which l… Alireza Saleh
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Shawn Steele
- RE: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Sarmad Hussain
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL ( Which l… Andrew Sullivan
- Another thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Alireza Saleh
- Re: Another thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Vint Cerf
- Re: Another thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Eric Brunner-Williams
- Re: Another thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Vint Cerf
- Re: Another thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Another thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Eric Brunner-Williams
- Re: Another thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Eric Brunner-Williams
- Re: Another thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Elisabeth Blanconil
- Re: Another thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Patrick Suger
- RE: Another thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Shawn Steele
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Martin J. Dürst
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Martin J. Dürst
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Martin J. Dürst
- RE: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Shawn Steele
- Re: MAYBE-TRANSITIONAL, a historical tale Martin J. Dürst
- Re: MAYBE-TRANSITIONAL, a historical tale Mark Davis ☕
- Re: MAYBE-TRANSITIONAL, a historical tale Eric Brunner-Williams
- RE: MAYBE-TRANSITIONAL, a historical tale Shawn Steele
- Re: MAYBE-TRANSITIONAL, a historical tale Eric Brunner-Williams
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Andrew Sullivan
- RE: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Shawn Steele
- RE: MAYBE-TRANSITIONAL, a historical tale Shawn Steele
- Re: MAYBE-TRANSITIONAL, a historical tale Elisabeth Blanconil
- RE: MAYBE-TRANSITIONAL, a historical tale Shawn Steele
- Re: Additional thoughts on TRANSITIONAL Mark Andrews