Re: Problems of Internationalized Mail Address eXtensions (IMAX)

Actually dan, though it has been brought up before that 8 bit DNS is frowned
upon, as of bind 9, anyone could have already set up a working DNS/mail
infrastructure using bind 9 and qmail using UTF-8.

However, IDNA was chosen because of better compression comparitive to UTF-8
and most importantly, the use of this "shim" meant that all legacy
implementations would not have to be upgraded. So, while ACE will probably
be around for an extremely long time to come, it may be a bit premature to
say that investigations into divesting the 7 bit legacy is too bothersome to
be attempted.

jeffrey j zahari

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Kohn" <[email protected]>
To: "Lawrence Greenfield" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 12:37 PM
Subject: RE: Problems of Internationalized Mail Address eXtensions (IMAX)


>
> By contrast, I don't think IMAX offers any bandwidth, complexity, or
> usability advantages, while still requiring a lot of additional
> complexity in implementation.  In that way, as I said in the original
> message, I believe it is much more analogous to the (since withdrawn)
> proposal to implement IDNs using EDNS and UTF-8.  One could certainly
> design something that would work, but it would require servers to be
> upgraded, would offer no more functionality than IDNA, and would
> increase complexity.  Why bother?
>
>           - dan
> --
> Dan Kohn <mailto:[email protected]>
> <http://www.dankohn.com/>  <tel:+1-650-327-2600>
>