Re: Document Status?

"James Seng" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.idn
Message-ID <003901c25b91$08a43540$4d00a8c0@JAMESSONYVAIO>
> > 1. registry vs Nameprep
> >
> > I have already answered you the Nameprep is okay. You have not make a
case
> > registry mapping is going to be a problem.
>
> I and others already listed the case in this list.
> the mapping won't be reflected in protocols and application comparisons
> unlike that caseinsensitive matching of ASCII names.

I did not hear other but I certainly hear you.

And I responsed to you why your "mapping" problem isnt a problem. You have
not stated why my reasoning is wrong or otherwise.

> >
> > 2. "ambiguity" of Nameprep/IDNA
> >
> > You have only stated your opinion it is ambigous. You have absolute
right to
> > do so.
> > But you have not stated any technical reasons why.
>
> You keep on insisting that IDN introduces no new security problem than
that of
> '0' and 'o' in ASCII names.

Did I insist that IDN introduce no new security? I think you hear it in your
dreams. I suggest you read the new security consideration in the existing
drafts (Stringprep particularly).

> But that is not correct. IDN introduce the problem
> of look-exactly-identical chars. That was not in ASCII names.

And your proposal draft is...?

-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.