[Standards] Re: IDNA text for rfc3920bis

Mridul mridul at sun.com
Thu Apr 12 22:23:08 CDT 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
>>    [STD13].
>>
>>
> 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 
> [RFC3490].

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).

Thanks,
Mridul

>
> Dave.



More information about the Standards mailing list