By the way, IRC protocol standard document clearly states what there is no character set defined, ... So, you cannot accuse any server in not supporting UTF-8
You can accuse them all you want. You're misinterpreting the spec. The RFC states that the specification defines no specific encoding-- ie. it is undefined by the spec and can be left up to either implementation of the client and/or server. Just because the spec does not say "you must support encoding X", does not mean a server implementor cannot be accused of not supporting encoding X. The HTTP specification does not enforce user-agents to support the PUT method, for instance, but the lack of support for PUT in popular browsers has been a huge hindrance on REST adoption over the last few years. Even though they can cite the spec all they want, web browser developers are still to blame for this. It's their responsibility (just like it is with servers) to ensure that the spec is implemented in a way that is most useful to its users. Encoding is a large problem for all IRC clients. Supporting encodings on the server is the easiest way to solve this problem. It should be done. Clinging to the literal spec that was written when computers had less than a megabyte of RAM is stifling. And people wonder why IRC is declining in popularity. Hint: it has nothing to do with webcam support; the problem is much more basic than that.
Sorry to interrupt UTF-8 praises, but theoretical maximum of 491 bytes (:n!u@h PRIVMSG #c :<491 bytes of payload><CR><LF>) reduces by 2 times
SJIS, the popular encoding for those "eastern ircers" also uses 2 bytes, so you're reducing the byte count there too.
And again, you're taking the spec way too literally here. The 512 byte length has always been an arbitrary value imposed by implementations of the time; again, this was written in 1993, when 0.5kb was a lot of data. 512 is a common value supported by some servers since its listed in the spec, but not all servers follow this. If UTF-8 adoption increased (and it has), servers would adjust accordingly. It would be similar to the way mIRC adjusted its line length in scripts from 900 to 4096 recently.