Subject: Re: Last Call: 'Domain Name System (DNS) Case Insensitivity Clarification' to Proposed Standard

From: Bruce Lilly <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:19:29 -0500

>  Date: 2005-02-01 18:43
>  From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
>  To: IETF-Announce <[email-masked]>
>  CC: [email-masked]
 
> The IESG has received a request from the DNS Extensions WG to consider the 
> following document:
> 
> - 'Domain Name System (DNS) Case Insensitivity Clarification '
>    <draft-ietf-dnsext-insensitive-05.txt> as a Proposed Standard
> 
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action.  Please send any comments to the
> [email-masked] or [email-masked] mailing lists by 2005-02-15.

Bravo!  I have one question and one related note:

Q: Why is the reference to "ASCII" given as the 1968 version rather
   than ANSI INCITS 4-1986 (R2002)?  [N.B. no typos, the dates really
   are 1968 and 1986]

On a related note, RFC 2822 introduced a syntactic mechanism to
prohibit line folding within the domain part of message identifiers.
One individual regards that as a declaration that the domain names
in such identifiers have magically become case-sensitive (refs:
http://www.imc.org/ietf-822/mail-archive/msg04712.html
http://www.imc.org/ietf-822/mail-archive/msg04876.html
http://www.imc.org/ietf-822/mail-archive/msg04909.html
http://www.imc.org/ietf-822/mail-archive/msg04969.html ). It has
been an item on my list of things to do to write a draft clarifying
the syntactic issue, and its null effect on the right-hand side of
identifier semantics as domain indication, reaffirming case-
insensitivity.  It would be nice if the draft under discussion
were to address that specific issue, obviating the need for a
separate document clarifying 2822.  On the other hand, if it does
not, at least it can serve as a reference for such a separate
document.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:15:52 -0500

--On Wednesday, 02 February, 2005 14:19 -0500 Bruce Lilly
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>...
> Q: Why is the reference to "ASCII" given as the 1968 version
> rather    than ANSI INCITS 4-1986 (R2002)?  [N.B. no typos,
> the dates really    are 1968 and 1986]
>...

Because some incompatible changes were made in the ASCII
definition in the early 70s that would have fouled up the
"network virtual terminal" character set.  You will find that
X3.4-1968 is referenced in most Internet applications protocols
that require an ASCII reference, include those for telnet, ftp,
and the email base protocols as well as the DNS ones.

   john