I18n support

[Radu "Ux" D.]

Well, somebody ate a part of my message ;)
Here it is revised:


	They are the same result just different presentations of it.

Yup, agree. And I am interested in knowing what are the representations.
I noticed that in journal the upper character codes are encoded, no
matter where (owner, RRData) are they:

SOA: d.itcnetworks burebista.itcnetworks. . 424 10800 3600 604800 86400
d.itcnetworks 12312 IN TXT "\129\132\225"
SOA: d.itcnetworks burebista.itcnetworks. . 424 10800 3600 604800 86400
d.itcnetworks 12312 IN TXT "\225\148\132\129"
SOA: d.itcnetworks burebista.itcnetworks. . 425 10800 3600 604800 86400
SOA: d.itcnetworks burebista.itcnetworks. . 425 10800 3600 604800 86400
\223\252\246\228\252\214\196.d.itcnetworks. TXT "\223\228" "\196" "\220"
                                             TXT
"\223\252\246\228\220\214\196"
SOA: d.itcnetworks burebista.itcnetworks. . 426 10800 3600 604800 86400
So, in fact, the named is using a proprietary encoding. Could I use as a
fact the supposition that named is always replacing the characters with
\*** encoding? I am refering to: journals, zone files, query / update
answers.

>	The DNS moves bits not characters.  It up to the application
>	to display the bits as it sees fit.
>
Yes, I understand that. My question is refering strictly to encodings. I
mean, is there a standard or a presentation of this encodings? A client
should know this aspect. From where? Imagine a client would like to
inspect his own zone file and ends up looking at some strange numbers
instead the owner names.
And a more general question: are the usual tools (browsers, working
servers) interpreting correct these codes? Of course, from your
experience... I wasn't able to find complains on this list, so I suppose
yes, they are dealing correctly with BIND named..

Thx
Radu "Ux" D.