Subject: Re: [idn] Re: 7 bits forever!

From: "John Stracke" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 14:24:26 -0500

>> >That is, if we start thinking about "8+ everywhere" instead of "ACE
>> >everywhere" scenario, then how we can get there from here.
>>
>> Same question: if you have a non-backwards-compatible server, how do 
you
>> get people to use it?
>
>Non-backwards-compatible server? A server that wont handle ASCII and only
>handles UTF8... : >

No, a nameserver that won't handle the original form of DNS.  The original 
DNS packet format obviously can't cope with 8-bit labels, so a server that 
sent native UTF-8 in its replies (or a resolver that sent native UTF-8 in 
its queries) would break compatibility.

/========================================================\
|John Stracke                    |Principal Engineer     |
[email-masked]   |Incentive Systems, Inc.|
|http://www.incentivesystems.com |My opinions are my own.|
|========================================================|
|What do you mean, *you're* a solipsist?                 |
\========================================================/

---

From: "Edmon Chung" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 14:38:55 -0500

Hi John,

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Stracke" <[email-masked]>
> its queries) would break compatibility.

First of all, it is not "obvious" that the current "packet format" cannot
handle 8 bits because last time I checked, they operate in octets.
Secondly, the proposed nameserver will definitely handle the original form
of DNS... I dont understand what you are trying to say...  I would not
expect a version 1.0 of a word processor to be able to read a Version 4.0
formatted document. Would you?  But I would expect that the Ver 4.0 word
processor be able to read a Ver 1.0 doc.  This is backwards compatible as I
understand it.

But, if you say that nameservers are not capable of handling EDNS, that is
true.
So, the idea is to respond in ACE if asked in ACE; respond in 8 if asked in
8 (also include the associated ACE to be used incase destination
servers...http/mail/etc... are not upgraded).

Edmon

---

From: "David Leung \(Neteka Inc.\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 15:29:29 -0500

> its queries) would break compatibility.

A NS that won't handle original form of DNS... which is what I said above,
where would be a NS that only handles UTF8 but not the "original"(LDH)
form... that's interesting, I would wanna see that implementation too : )