North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: COM/NET informational message
- From: bert hubert
- Date: Fri Jan 03 14:27:46 2003
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 07:15:43PM +0000, E.B. Dreger wrote:
> Yes, comparisons are case-insensitive. So what? strcasecmp()
> works on ASCII strings. Now it must work on <new encoding x>.
> Why not let <new encoding x> be UTF-8, something programmers
> should support already? Maybe MS-style Unicode encoding? Why
> add yet another encoding?!
Even the current MS encoding does not work. Check out 188.8.131.52, which I
think runs VMS. It does not even pass >127 characters to the root-servers.
It is the nameserver for a /16.
dig www.abcț.com A @184.108.40.206 <- www.abc\xfe.com
> I fear I may be straying OT, for this is layers 6/7...
Hoping for all nameservers to magically break RFC compliance because you
think a 'properly coded nameserver' should behave is naive to say the least.
PowerDNS may well lowercase your query using functions not guaranteed to do
anything useful on >127 characters. Perhaps they are being helpful and
change capital-U-umlaut to lowercase-U-umlaut. Who knows.
http://www.PowerDNS.com Open source, database driven DNS Software
http://lartc.org Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HOWTO