Re: U-labels and draft-obispo-epp-idn-00
Patrik Fältström <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.provreg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 15 feb 2012, at 05:56, Jay Daley wrote: >> You do not talk about cases where they believe they can register some unicode string that is not a U-label? > > You only asked for one example, not a canonical ruleset for how we process the U-label data! Obviously the U-label must be valid and if it is not then we don't process it in the same way we don't process invalid A-labels. Fair. >> Note, the discussion is about U-labels and A-labels, not unicode strings and A-labels. > > And my point was that for non-IDNs the registrant believes they are registering an A-label which is the same A-label that the registry registers. But with IDN there is no longer this direct relationship as the registrant believes they are registering the U-label while the registry actually registers the A-label. I claim the registrant believe they register a unicode string, while the registry in fact register an A-label. Thats why I am confused why people are so focused on U-labels. The trouble is in the unicode string -> U-label mapping, not the U-label -> A-label mapping. Patrik _______________________________________________ provreg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg