[vip] Draft on IDN Tables in XML

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 02:14:59PM +0100, JFC Morfin wrote:
> - the encoding scheme (unless we accept Unicode as a default value)

You had another alternative?  IDNA uses Unicode.  Adding an
alternative encoding is just begging for trouble.

> - the CLASS (unless we accept the ICANN/NTIA CLASS "IN" as a defaulf value)

Why does this need to be classed?  I can see a reason to add it: maybe
a future CLASS would not need any ACE.  But thought experiments,
proposals, and experience with other protocols so far suggest that it
would be easier to create DNSng than it would be to add a new
widely-supported CLASS to the DNS.  We can't even get new RRTYPEs
widely supported in the DNS.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com