[Standards] Re: IDNA text for rfc3920bis

Mridul mridul at sun.com
Mon Apr 16 18:56:22 UTC 2007

Joe Hildebrand wrote:
> On Apr 16, 2007, at 12:35 PM, Mridul wrote:
>>   I think the query was because :
>> If you used only hostnames - then they get resolved to the default 
>> domain : like peer1, peer2, etc would resolve to peer1.domain and work.
>> With peer1.localhost, unless you have resolution entries for these in 
>> the dns, it would not work (and other than /etc/hosts style entries - 
>> which are a pain to maintain across nodes).
> According to RFC 2606:
> <blockquote>
>       The ".localhost" TLD has traditionally been statically defined in
>       host DNS implementations as having an A record pointing to the
>       loop back IP address and is reserved for such use.  Any other use
>       would conflict with widely deployed code which assumes this use.
> </blockquote>
> So, "foo.localhost" pointing to another machine seems right out.

Thanks for the reference - I was not aware of this rfc for reserved TLD's.


>> For argument sake, we could envision that for high availability nodes 
>> ... use fully resolved hostnames.
> I have use cases where this won't work.  I can't share them at the 
> moment, unfortunately.  Suffice it to say this restriction would make 
> large numbers of deployed systems effectively non-standard in one fell 
> swoop.  As such, I would strongly object to this change in the bis 
> drafts.  I *would* support a best-practices XEP, however.

More information about the Standards mailing list