Alex,
I was a little behind in reading the various threads in this group! I wanted to
clarify some terminology with you. When you referred to OPES agents, you meant
any OPES device, OPES processors or callout server, right? I agree with you
that raw IDNA ML messages cannot be conveyed to even the OPES processor (or,
the callout processor too) from the content producer, using HTTP! I too am
curious as to how jfc says that OPES can be used for IDNA conversion if it has
to deal with this problem!
-Srini
-----Original Message-----
From: ext Alex Rousskov [mailto:rousskov(_at_)measurement-factory(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 4:48 PM
To: ietf-openproxy(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: is IDNA an OPES?
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, jfcm wrote:
My understanding is that IDNAs make HTTP messages malformed.
The IDNA has been designed so it does not do that.
Now I am confused: International domain names, as entered by users,
would make HTTP messages malformed because HTTP addresses are
ASCII-based, right? It is the proposed IDNA conversion that makes the
addresses well-formed for old protocols. Since you asked whether OPES
can be used to perform IDNA conversions, OPES would have to deal with
raw IDNAs as input, right? Raw IDNAs make HTTP messages malformed.
Malformed messages may not be able to reach OPES agents, even if those
agents can handle them. Yet, you are saying that there is no problem.
What am I missing?
Alex.