Re: Concerns about domain based names drafts
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Concerns about domain based names drafts



On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 05:27:43PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I think you do want to say what constant people should use; I don't
> think you can register it since there is no registry.

Either way, there's no registry even for that OID arc.

>     >> Section 5 seems to normatively introduce gss_import_name_utf8.
>     >> The specification of that function is not sufficient for
>     >> implementation.
> 
>     Nicolas> I what way is it not sufficient?
> 
> Doesn't define inputs, outputs, statuses, semantics.  Yes, a lot of
> this text will be copied from the existing spec.  However if you are
> going to define new functions you need to actually specify all the
> things that 2743 does for the functions.

I disagree.  The text reads:

   Support for non-ASCII internationalized domain names SHOULD be
   provided through a new function, GSS_Import_name_utf8(), that
   operates exactly like GSS_Import_name(), except that it MUST accept
   internationalized domain names both, as UTF-8 strings and as ACE-
   encoded strings via its input_name_string argument.

GSS_Import_name_utf8() is defined in terms of GSS_Import_name().  I
think that should be sufficient.  Perhaps the text should be a bit
clearer ("operates exactly like" might not imply "has the same input
and output parameters" to some readers), but otherwise I think that
cutting and pasting text from RFC2743 and RFC2744 would do a disservice
to readers.

>     >> In addition, I didn't think we planned to introduce
>     >> import_name_utf8 or display_name_utf8 in this spec.  I thought
>     >> we intended to have an informational note explaining how those
>     >> functions will deal with the domain based names.
> 
>     Nicolas> I don't see why we cannot introduce these here.  These
>     Nicolas> functions are pretty much the result of the discussions
>     Nicolas> at Chicago and on the list.
> 
> They are not within the scope of the draft.

Please elaborate; why not?

Nico
-- 


_______________________________________________
Kitten mailing list
Kitten at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten




Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.