Re: IDN eamples for testing

"James Seng" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.idn
Message-ID <013501c2f142$8f3388d0$1300a8c0@JSENGTOSHIBA>
No, I am not "misguided" whatever that means. I am repeating what the people
asked me.

Neither did I ask them to develop a client, or not to.

Lastly, in your private mail to me, you mention that you have not advertise
any server-side resolution solution. Could you confirm this in public?

Once you do, I will forward your response to the registries who have told me
"they said they can provide a DNS server that can resolve IDN" to put the
end to their misconceptions.

-James Seng

----- Original Message -----
From: "Edmon Chung" <[email protected]>
To: "James Seng" <[email protected]>; "IDN" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2003 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: [idn] IDN eamples for testing


> Hi James,
>
> If you are discussing about Neteka, I think you must be misguided in your
> discussions.
>
> Neteka supports the IDNA standards and we try to accomodate to the needs
of
> registries.  In fact we are scheduled to start publishing Punycode to TLD
> zones that we work with in the very near term.  While I can understand
your
> obsession about clients and plugins, asking each registry to create a
> "client" is not realistic!  Most will look to Microsoft or Netscape or
other
> browsers/DNS applications to be upgraded over time to IDNA.  Registries
are
> not DNS resolver or browser vendors.
>
> Meanwhile, registries really should be exerting some energy in preparing
for
> their "servers" for IDN registrations (and NOT the resolution side as you
> have probably gotten mixed up with).  For example handling registrations
and
> management of multilingual domain names within registration databases,
> considering character equivalence issues and provisioning, defining zone
> publishing policies for IDNs, etc. all of these are critical to the
success
> of the deployment of IDN.  And this is where Neteka mainly focuses on
> working with registries and preparing their "servers" to accept IDN
> registrations from their end-users.
>
> I hope this clarifies Neteka's works for you and others. :-)
>
> Edmon
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Seng" <[email protected]>
> To: "IDN" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 7:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [idn] IDN eamples for testing
>
>
> > > The .nu operator supports IDNA, among other things (you also
> > > can sent UTF-8 and various local encodings to their DNS servers).
> >
> > This sound bad. This is breaking the basic functionity of DNS.
> >
> > <whinning>This reminded me: Various registries have contacted me
regarding
> > how to deploy IDN, should they wish to. At least two of them have
mention
> > that some company in Toronto have told them they can deploy IDN using
> "just
> > DNS servers only", customized made I supposed.
> >
> > Obviously, IETF (or I for that matter) cannot tell anyone what they must
> do,
> > how to market their product, or how to deploy it.
> >
> > But when someone asked me "Are you sure I need to get some client deploy
> for
> > IDN? They told me I could just deploy their DNS servers to support
IDN.",
> I
> > have to explain IETF standardization, the pros & cons from technical &
> > business perspective, and why they *really* dont want to do so IMO.
> >
> > I have to do it twice now and it is not fun (not that I get paid for
doing
> > so either). Of course I am chessed off by this Toronto company! Couldnt
> they
> > just do their own marketing and educating their potential customer
> > properly?</whinning>
> >
> > > P.S. On a related issue: I was wondering whether this is proper
> > > operation of IDNA with HTTP, i.e. whether the ToASCII version
> > > of the host should be put into the Host: header. The obvious
> > > alternative would be to put a MIME-encoded version of the host
> > > name into the Host: field, but RFC 2616 is silent on whether
> > > this is allowed or not (they say that HTTP is "MIME-like")
> >
> > RFC 2616 is silent. But IDNA did specify that for any other protocols,
> > unless it is updated to handle IDN, we will default the encoding to be
> > Punycode. So yes, Punycode should be used in Host:.
> >
> > -James Seng
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.