[Last-Call] Re: Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-08

["Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

What’s an IETF discussion without a little pedanticism :)

 

You’re right, I was casual in my terms.

 

From: "tbray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <tbray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, July 9, 2024 at 1:15 PM
To: Rich Salz <rsalz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "secdir@xxxxxxxx" <secdir@xxxxxxxx>, "draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding.all@xxxxxxxx" <draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding.all@xxxxxxxx>, "last-call@xxxxxxxx" <last-call@xxxxxxxx>, "lisp@xxxxxxxx" <lisp@xxxxxxxx>, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Re: Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-08

 

On Jul 9, 2024 at 10:07:44 AM, "Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

UTF8 is upward compatible with ASCII.  That is, all seven-bit ASCII characters are valid UTF8 characters.

 

I don’t want to be pedantic here (sigh, anything involving Unicode always becomes pedantic) but Rich, it wouldn’t actually be a good idea to require “UTF-8”. What you want to require is UTF-8 encoded Unicode characters, and probably not all of them.  PRECIS in RFC8264 provides a fully-thought-through subset of Unicode for identifiers. If that’s too complicated, https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bray-unichars-09.html, now under AD sponsorship by Orie, provides a much simpler but still useful subset.

-- 
last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx