Hi, Since the WG consensus call is done, I don't think we need to press on in the WG. I will raise my concerns about ignoring UTS-46 in IETF Last Call.
> "The limited scope of this specification likely mitigates potential confusion caused by the use > of visually similar characters in domain names..." This doesn't seem like a strong claim. > "...in any case, such concerns are a matter for application-level protocols and user > interfaces, not the matching of certificates." Sure, that's what's in the still-referenced UTS-39. [0] But there's a bunch of normative text in Section 6.3 about converting from U-labels to A-labels, and that concerns the deleted reference to UTS-46 (since it allows things that are not U-labels or A-labels, and lots of programs use it). I wrote a small Go program to illustrate.[1] thanks, Rob [0] https://wiki.mozilla.org/IDN_Display_Algorithm [1] https://github.com/sayrer/go-idna $ go run idn.go 🕵💻.st name: 🕵💻.st Simple Punycode conversion: xn--3s8htl.st MapForLookup, Transitional: xn--3s8htl.st ValidateForRegistration: xn--3s8htl.st $ go run idn.go blåbærgrød.no <http://xn--blbrgrd-fxak7p.no> name: blåbærgrød.no <http://xn--blbrgrd-fxak7p.no> Simple Punycode conversion: xn--blbrgrd-fxak7p.no MapForLookup, Transitional: xn--blbrgrd-fxak7p.no ValidateForRegistration: xn--blbrgrd-fxak7p.no $ go run idn.go *.faß.com <http://fass.com> name: *.faß.com <http://fass.com> Simple Punycode conversion: *.xn--fa-hia.com 2023/03/02 13:10:02 idna: disallowed rune U+002A exit status 1
_______________________________________________ Uta mailing list Uta@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
