[Standards] Re: IDNA text for rfc3920bis
mridul at sun.com
Fri Apr 13 03:23:08 UTC 2007
Dave Cridland wrote:
> On Fri Apr 13 20:49:23 2007, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> In my working copy I have added the following sentence:
>> If the domain identifier is a fully qualified domain
>> name, the final character of the domain identifier MUST NOT be any
>> character that is recognized as a dot, i.e., U+002E (full stop),
>> U+3002 (ideographic full stop), U+FF0E (fullwidth full stop), or
>> U+FF61 (halfwidth ideographic full stop); i.e., the domain name MUST
>> NOT include an explicit zero-length root label as described in
> I'm not sure redefining the list (even if it's the same values for
> now) is a good idea.
> What about:
> If the domain identifier is a fully qualified domain name, the final
> character of the domain identifier MUST NOT be a dot recognized as an
> IDN label separator as defined in Section 3.1 requirement (1) of
Hi Dave, all,
Just a query - can we have domain names which are not fully qualified ?
That is, if we have user at subdomain - and subdomain get resolved to
subdomain.domain, are both jid's : "user at subdomain" &
"user at subdomain.domain" supposed to be the same ? (roster, acl's, etc).
My understanding is - no. In which case, do we need to allow domain
names which are not fully qualified in the jid's ? (which would simplify
the text further and add more restrictions).
More information about the Standards