On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:27:21AM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > recollection of one specific person. The "alphabetic-only" rule in RFC > 1123 is just a side note, never detailed, and presented as a fact > (which it was at this time), not as a mandatory restriction.
I don't know whether I agree that it's just a "side note". It seems to be a clarifying discussion used to explain why an innovation is safe. As we have seen in the current discussion, there is possibly more than one interpretation of that safety. I think that's what we have to consider. > There are no *TECHNICAL* reasons to limit TLD to alphabetic > characters. I think this is what's up for dispute. If people have interpreted the text in 1123 as normative and built resolvers using the logic there, then that is a technical reason to limit TLD characters. Even if we think those resolvers were mistaken in their implementation, they're deployed. Interoperation is one of our more important values, and that includes interoperation with reasonable interpretations of RFCs that we nevertheless think are mistaken. Best, A -- Andrew Sullivan a...@shinkuro.com Shinkuro, Inc. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
