Re: Fwd: Disagreement between libidn2 and Python idna

[Tim Rühsen]

On 07.11.20 00:22, Ian Eldred Pudney wrote:
> This input causes libidn2 encoding to report an error of "string has 
> forbidden bi-directional properties". To determine which library was 
> wrong, I implemented the bidi rule myself, and I believe this should be 
> valid.
>
>   * Domain name:
>
>     ਗ਼.ÿ߽̃̃̃
>
>   * Domain name hex codepoints:
>
>     ['a17', 'a3c', '2e', 'ff', '7fd', '303', '303', '303']
>
>   * Punycode:
>
>     
> xn--lkvaa9xr87caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa7968dcp2n7tvk.xn--p9mx3db62rwgjlncaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaba41m468u.xn--bfj606ben8bfnaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa79563b

Libunistring returns the BIDI category UC_BIDI_R (Right-to-Left) for 
codepoint 0x7fd [1].

From what I can see in the libunistring sources, it is based on Unicode 
9.0.0 while 0x7fd has been introduced with Unicode 11.0 [2].

So something here might be out of sync.

I'll add bug-libunistring@gnu.org here to confirm (or not) this 
assumption and if there are any plans to upgrade to Unicode 11.0.


[1] https://unicode-table.com/en/07FD/
[2] 
https://www.iana.org/assignments/idna-tables-11.0.0/idna-tables-11.0.0.xhtml#idna-tables-context

OpenPGP_0x08302DB6A2670428.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature