IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [regext] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-regext-dnrd-objects-mapping-05

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Sun, 23 February 2020 20:28 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EC683A0E86; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 12:28:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=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 fBisCU6LJ9XN; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 12:28:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io1-f44.google.com (mail-io1-f44.google.com [209.85.166.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BC0B3A0E84; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 12:28:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io1-f44.google.com with SMTP id s24so8139284iog.5; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 12:28:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fpXO1DLUM2UMwgLGJm1XlF96a6F6aeaMrWb5fZTo4mo=; b=cytKiQEnljK76akxpsUafG760dFFWc0D8pQHZBxGLA563xpNYAjGk+f20dRb9XUmCu JaWoMEH7N/E7QnuDmRFx7IEpXkFP/xeEm04K5q841IghnMfz1NN+sJ2wh/D4gS3znJf7 ZcvLRfczYAf7UOqZrVY0RPF961Pd6CQZbWvre7CAvODBpTQZxUInyrEcoapnFYpztgz6 /aUTeN5Q+YMsQLNa1OJHF6mj95ULn+YCV++VXwYujiBaZATnIbbAGMAK0gnN14VM6GsS Ymb6tndrlB9rKtwT3uatQ7vfYUuDHw3ctTVaK26OeUG4+hvWBaz8WdWtaMHqGB9pTl2O d/9g==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUkM+sYGzYsQLpDm3sIOKkMFhVuPSOfSWpSnbwPOj+LlaTm6TJd FiowBwnofRvG6KAkA3SeG0SsOGTcuTt/BGbfolM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy+OPtyWVWqlpqfqYNRxJwOpb56YfELpn3zGFXhWPUrmd0HLJUedMIY5U884tlYPG71yAFcP38baH13lNAlIT8=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:9b94:: with SMTP id r20mr16390213iom.140.1582489726999; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 12:28:46 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CALaySJJKGLxCanozQiJYeAj-Ek3E8bgABo2qVmDcMTm6-DMbNQ@mail.gmail.com> <528CE898-367E-41F6-8E88-E5E55C5B4BF5@icann.org>
In-Reply-To: <528CE898-367E-41F6-8E88-E5E55C5B4BF5@icann.org>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 12:28:35 -0800
Message-ID: <CALaySJJKg6C6H6wuZ+5HA5H2_FO3Hn2_vpO7DpmiU4RRirPRmw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gustavo Lozano <gustavo.lozano@icann.org>
Cc: "draft-ietf-regext-dnrd-objects-mapping.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-regext-dnrd-objects-mapping.all@ietf.org>, regext <regext@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/L8W2nWfJL-CVFeiSqYoR49tjaCU>
Subject: Re: [regext] [Ext] AD review of draft-ietf-regext-dnrd-objects-mapping-05
X-BeenThere: regext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions <regext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/regext/>
List-Post: <mailto:regext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 20:28:52 -0000

Hi, Gustavo, and thanks for addressing my comments.

On just one point:

>     — Section 10 —
>     What is the reason for allowing other encodings than UTF-8?  Would it
>     not be best to say “MUST use UTF-8”, rather than making it
>     SHOULD/RECOMMENDED?
>
> Section 10 is modeled after section 5 of RFC 5730 that draft-ietf-regext-dnrd-objects-mapping
> uses extensively.  The recommendation is to not make draft-ietf-regext-dnrd-objects-mapping
> more restrictive than EPP or not cause incompatibilities with existing implementations by keeping
> the language as is.

OK, I'm going to go ahead and send this out for last call, but I'm
also going to ask the I18N Directorate to have a closer look at this
and see what they think.  I do think it's time we make it clear that
we are deprecating the use of encodings other than UTF-8 to represent
Unicode in our protocols.  5370 is well over 10 years old now, and I
don't really buy that we have to remain aligned with it today.

Barry

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email