Re: [DNSOP] Status of IDNA

2017-04-13 Thread Andrew Sullivan
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 02:39:36AM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > Well, IIRC they sensibly converged on a case-folded normal form > that ensures that https://Духовный.org maps to the same underlying > wire-form domain as https://духовный.org, i.e. both result in > queries for xn--b1adqpd3ao5c.o

Re: [DNSOP] Status of IDNA

2017-04-12 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 07:45:41PM -0400, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 03:47:14PM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > > Just move on to non-transitional UTS#46. > > Given that its mappings include many emojis, which aren't allowed > under either IDNA2003 or IDNA2008, I think the

Re: [DNSOP] Status of IDNA

2017-04-12 Thread Andrew Sullivan
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 03:47:14PM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > Just move on to non-transitional UTS#46. Given that its mappings include many emojis, which aren't allowed under either IDNA2003 or IDNA2008, I think there is an apparent problem with UTS#46 too. One might be forgiven for wonderin

Re: [DNSOP] Status of IDNA

2017-04-12 Thread Andrew Sullivan
Accidentally sent this just to Florian. Fixing that. On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 01:36:49PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > What's the current standardization status of IDNA? It's complicated. > As far as I can tell, a lot of vendors are still stuck with the original > IDNA standard (IDNA2003). Wel

Re: [DNSOP] Status of IDNA

2017-04-12 Thread Viktor Dukhovni
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 01:36:49PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > What's the current standardization status of IDNA? > > in different browsers. Some browsers are still doing "transitional" UTS#46, it is time they move on. In up to date releases: Firefox:Already U