Re: Punycode & nslookup

jefsey wrote: > At 11:06 06/12/2009, Chris Buxton wrote: >> On Dec 5, 2009, at 6:34 AM, JFC Morfin wrote: >> > Chris Buxton 4 décembre 2009 20:29 >> >> The reason IDN support in the BIND query tools (dig, host, >> nslookup) is not the default is because it relies on a 3rd party >> library, which m

Re: Punycode & nslookup

At 14:07 07/12/2009, Danny Mayer wrote: > The reason IDN support in the BIND query tools (dig, host, nslookup) is not the default is because it relies on a 3rd party library, which must be installed and configured by the package builder beforehand. This is just like SSL support, needed for DNSSEC

Re: Punycode & nslookup

Chris Buxton wrote: > On Dec 4, 2009, at 10:12 AM, Joe Baptista wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Chris Buxton wrote: >> >>> nslookup will only understand IDN if BIND is compiled with that option in the ./configure step. >> might be a good idea if it was the default option. as idn be

Re: Punycode & nslookup

At 11:00 06/12/2009, Chris Buxton wrote: On Dec 5, 2009, at 5:04 AM, Kai Szymanski wrote: > What is the way for the future: Should the browser encode idn's into > punycode and send it to the nameserver (like example below) or should > the browser send the un-encoded idn to the nameserver and the

Re: Punycode & nslookup

At 11:06 06/12/2009, Chris Buxton wrote: On Dec 5, 2009, at 6:34 AM, JFC Morfin wrote: > Chris Buxton 4 décembre 2009 20:29 >> The reason IDN support in the BIND query tools (dig, host, nslookup) is not the default is because it relies on a 3rd party library, which must be installed and config

Re: Punycode & nslookup

On Dec 5, 2009, at 6:34 AM, JFC Morfin wrote: > Chris Buxton 4 décembre 2009 20:29 >> The reason IDN support in the BIND query tools (dig, host, nslookup) is not >> the default is because it relies on a 3rd party library, which must be >> installed and configured by the package builder beforeha

Re: Punycode & nslookup

On Dec 5, 2009, at 5:04 AM, Kai Szymanski wrote: > What is the way for the future: Should the browser encode idn's into > punycode and send it to the nameserver (like example below) or should > the browser send the un-encoded idn to the nameserver and the nameserver > have to do the "encoding-stuf

Re: Punycode & nslookup

On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 02:04:18PM +0100, Kai Szymanski wrote: > Hi Chris, > hi joe, > > ok..i will compile bind (resp. the libs) by myself and try it out. Thanks! > > What is the way for the future: Should the browser encode idn's into > punycode and send it to the nameserver (like example below

Re: Punycode & nslookup

Hi! Kay, I take back the entire thread since this is something which really match what is under warm discussion at the IETF WG/IDNSBIS. Kai Szymanski 4 décembre 2009 15:41 One of our customers wan't a Domain with "Umlaute" (german special characters like "ä"). Is it correct when i have con

Re: Punycode & nslookup

Hi Chris, hi joe, ok..i will compile bind (resp. the libs) by myself and try it out. Thanks! What is the way for the future: Should the browser encode idn's into punycode and send it to the nameserver (like example below) or should the browser send the un-encoded idn to the nameserver and the nam

Re: Punycode & nslookup

On Dec 4, 2009, at 10:12 AM, Joe Baptista wrote: > On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Chris Buxton wrote: > >> nslookup will only understand IDN if BIND is compiled with that option in >> the ./configure step. > > might be a good idea if it was the default option. as idn becomes popular the >

Re: Punycode & nslookup

Folks, remember when discussing 'nslookup' that there are not only at least three [?] major revisions in the BIND line, but also an identically-named tool on MS Windows. I'm sure the older ones don't support punycode. I wouldn't know about the MSW tool. Maybe not a problem with the specific post

Re: Punycode & nslookup

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Chris Buxton wrote: > nslookup will only understand IDN if BIND is compiled with that option in > the ./configure step. > might be a good idea if it was the default option. as idn becomes popular the lack of idn support for the tools will result in confusion. >

Re: Punycode & nslookup

On Dec 4, 2009, at 7:23 AM, Kai Szymanski wrote: > Hi Joe, > > my "problem" is: I can't test the zone with nslookup (only when i use the > puny-encoded domainname). nslookup will only understand IDN if BIND is compiled with that option in the ./configure step. > Also other tools who uses dns t

Re: Punycode & nslookup

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Kai Szymanski wrote: > Hi Joe, > > my "problem" is: I can't test the zone with nslookup (only when i use the > puny-encoded domainname). Also other tools who uses dns to resolv the > entered domainname (like ping > www.umlauttestäöü.de

Re: Punycode & nslookup

Hi Joe, my "problem" is: I can't test the zone with nslookup (only when i use the puny-encoded domainname). Also other tools who uses dns to resolv the entered domainname (like ping www.umlauttestäöü.de) did'nt work. So i thought that 1. The User enters a url with Umlauts in browser 2. Brows

Re: Punycode & nslookup

You configure an idn zone the same way you do for any other - so I assume your config below is correct - although the location of the master file master/umlauttestäöü.de.hosts contains non ascii char I don't think that is an issue in todays unix/linux environment. It would of been a problem in the

Punycode & nslookup

Hi! One of our customers wan't a Domain with "Umlaute" (german special characters like "ä"). Is it correct when i have configured the zone like zone "xn--umlauttest-z5a0tyc.de" { type master; file "master/umlauttestäöü.de.hosts"; allow-transfer { can_transfer; }; #