Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idn-idna-08.txt

what has been the practice in implementations of the various
referenced RFCs? John's interpretation or Robert's?

or has the apparent ambiguity also shown up in working
implementations?

vint

At 06:21 AM 5/30/2002 -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
>(i) Whether the correct reading on the DNS specs is that "ASCII"
>versus "binary" is a function of RR type, or a function of the
>bits in the octets.  I take the text to suggest that _only_
>ASCII (note, ASCII, not LDH) is permitted in RR types defined in
>or by 1034/1035, but that "future" RR types (and Classes) can be
>defined to have binary labels.  Robert takes it as permitted
>characters outside the ASCII range, with case handling undefined
>for those characters.