Re: [idn] opting out of SC/TC equivalence

["ben" <ben@cc-www.com>]

Hi James/Bill,

> While I'll leave Eric to answer that question for himself,
> I am left cold by your attitude regarding IETF participation
> and consenses building. Until you are willing to learn from
> others and have responsible dialog, it is my opinion that
> you will not gain support for your flawed ideas.
> But, since you don't care about other registries, interoperability
> is not an issue... ergo, its not an IETF issue, your SCS is a
closed,
> propriatary solution.  It will never be a standard.
>

I have formally submitted my draft.  As James has suggested, I will
try to build up support off-line before I bring my "Supreme CDN
system" back to the public discussion.

I truly do want to apologize to the registries for saying stupid
things like "I don't care about the registries... I only care about
myself...".  I do want to learn how to build consenses as I am
starting to understand what interoperability is all about and the
importance of it.  I will email people privately to get support and I
hope that they can see beyond my past cocky attitude and look at my
idea for what it is worth.  With all humblenss, my idea is not only
not flawed, but if you take the time to understand it, you will find
that it indeed can be applied to solve many problems and issues we
have with CDNs.  I did not call it a Supreme for no reason.

I had a bad attitude... but my intentions had always been good.

Thanks
Ben Chan