IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IDNA and U+08A1 and related cases (was: Re: Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-json-i-json-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT))

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Mon, 26 January 2015 09:12 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EF421A87E4; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:12:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.043
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.043 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id auZZQgzhwnl5; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:12:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a86.g.dreamhost.com (sub4.mail.dreamhost.com [69.163.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B56431A8773; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:12:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a86.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a86.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83E11360072; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:12:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=42kpf8VXXhyyX9axdmOp v9Mi91o=; b=l3bZgqFDWBLcgXSo+RckRSuQ6LpB8igxdzan/BCYGoR95tkq+IZ2 3gTN8ifXItskCGFNOhUoVTOxoubc38r0R8sU5W8c7Bc65AAhEXRrzMN7oC+pICE6 xEhOSuOyDat4KzPUrgfuXOPYBP23YH1v/J7dI4AT3fzL3xGF+h1XDyA=
Received: from mail-wg0-f43.google.com (mail-wg0-f43.google.com [74.125.82.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a86.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5C409360059; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:12:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wg0-f43.google.com with SMTP id y19so7801941wgg.2; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:12:30 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.218.133 with SMTP id pg5mr30323922wic.70.1422263550294; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:12:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.217.7.206 with HTTP; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:12:30 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <54C5FAD2.1010507@ix.netcom.com>
References: <B22C902579D0C7B5ADAA03C4@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <20150121194249.GT2350@localhost> <5A8468D3DF4EEDF3A4715FD7@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <20150121212700.GU2350@localhost> <F51F2760094ECDCACD7BD411@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <54C5DF1E.2070106@ix.netcom.com> <54C5E9F9.2000501@qti.qualcomm.com> <54C5FAD2.1010507@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 03:12:30 -0600
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOiomYxRk-o_Hi+EBnO6rdefmL1rJRPcGXC4wKULh4Wq=g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: IDNA and U+08A1 and related cases (was: Re: Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-json-i-json-05: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT))
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1135eac2b1466f050d8a890a"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/61ibQyDQtnHTyvVBq_yXllsiNBQ>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, "idna-update@alvestrand.no" <idna-update@alvestrand.no>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 09:12:32 -0000

As far as I'm concerned it's clear that the correct way to handle these
cases is: as confusables.  Is this wrong?

Nick
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email