nameprep

Erik van der Poel wrote:
> Besides, in networking, it's better to be conservative. You don't start 
> with a short blacklist and then grow it when you find others. No, you 
> start with a whitelist, and grow that.

One could even make an argument along these lines for nameprep. Perhaps 
nameprep should not have started with the *huge* Unicode character set, 
subsequently making a feeble attempt to reduce that set to a safe one.

One could make the argument that the nameprep RFC does not adhere to the 
old rule:

"Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send"

This is from section 1.2.2 of RFC 1122, a key RFC also known as STD 3:

http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc1122.txt

I wonder if something like this would catch the attention of the IETF or 
even the IESG?

Erik