"Eric A. Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The problem with the current spec is that case-folding and > normalization will impose restrictions on these assignments. This > is inappropriate for a generic i18n domain name label syntax. On a > secondary note, normalization and lowercasing are problems having to > do with hostnames
The existing DNS requires *all* domain labels to be case-insensitive, not just host labels. See RFC 1035. So domain names are already inappropriate for any data types that are case-sensitive. > > The prohibited list in nameprep is pretty small, and they're all > > characters that you'd have to be somewhat crazy to want to use in > > domain names. > > I think you meant hostname here. Remember that hostname rules apply to > delegations. Domain name rules are a broader category which also include > things like SRV, email addresses, and so forth. I understand that not all domain names are host names. I meant domain names. Have you actually looked at the prohibited list in Nameprep? I think it will be extremely rare that someone wishes they could use one of those characters in a domain name (of any type). > The email people will come up with their own character restrictions, > which is exactly the point. The namespace should ALLOW them to come > up with mapping rules, case-folding, normalization and whatever other > rules they wish. I mean, if they want to have a perverse mailbox > sequence, why shouldn't they? The codecs should only deal with inputs > and outputs. I'm pretty certain that's what you were told. I was basically told not to discuss email local-parts on this mailing list. AMC
