Paul Hoffman <paul(_dot_)hoffman(_at_)vpnc(_dot_)org> writes:
At 11:30 AM +0200 8/14/07, Simon Josefsson wrote:
One risk is that the specification cannot use Unicode code points from a
newer Unicode version than IDNA ToASCII supports, right now that means
That is not necessarily true. The current version of IDNA supports
Unicode version 3.2. A future version of IDNA may support later
versions of Unicode.
I believe the assumption here is that the document would reference the
current IDNA version. Or are you suggesting that this document should
wait until the IDNAbis effort is done?
Some IETF protocols can easily negotiate support for UTF-8 on
both sides, and using UTF-8 rather than Punycode seems more robust and
like better engineering to me.
Un-normalized fails miserably when exact matching is needed, such as
it is in IBE.
Sending UTF-8 does not preclude normalizing from happening when it is