https://github.com/richsalz/draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis/pull/59
On 7/26/22, 6:22 PM, "Peter Saint-Andre" wrote:
Yes, this looks right.
On 7/26/22 4:03 PM, Salz, Rich wrote:
> I think you’re right, and that it was a mistake (caused by my ignorance
> of details of DNS/IDNA stuff)
] Security consideration for IDNs in
draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis
Hello,
Apologies for not flagging this sooner, but I did want to raise this
while a revised I-D is needed for addressing IP-IDs so perhaps this
could be addressed as well.
Section 7.2 [1] contains the following guidance:
I think you’re right, and that it was a mistake (caused by my ignorance of
details of DNS/IDNA stuff) to not remove it.
From: Corey Bonnell
Date: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 at 5:57 PM
To: "uta@ietf.org"
Subject: [Uta] Security consideration for IDNs in draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis
Hello,
Hello,
Apologies for not flagging this sooner, but I did want to raise this while a
revised I-D is needed for addressing IP-IDs so perhaps this could be
addressed as well.
Section 7.2 [1] contains the following guidance:
"Allowing internationalized domain names can lead to visually similar
ch
