[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [idn] Re: Changes to RACE
- To: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>,idn@ops.ietf.org
- Subject: Re: [idn] Re: Changes to RACE
- From: bill@mail.nic.nu (J. William Semich)
- Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 08:50:14 -0400
- Delivery-date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 05:51:55 -0700
- Envelope-to: idn-data@psg.com
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this work group only developing
*requirements* and not taking action on any RACE, nameprep or other
implementation proposals? Is that what you mean by "when this WG is finished"?
Thanks,
Bill Semich
At 10:53 AM 10/19/00 -0700, Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
>At 9:21 AM +0800 10/18/00, James Seng wrote:
>>Just a quickie note. Any correct implementation of RACE _should_ already
have
>>this feature since if all input streams comes from ROW 0, then there
shouldnt
>>be any RACE transformation.
>
>Sorry, but that's not correct. race-02 did not check for that case.
>That is why I had to update the draft.
>
>>IMHO, this requirement should be done at the nameprep level, and not the
RACE
>>transformation. Supposing we decided to move away from RACE to something
else
>>(just example sake), we can ensure this behavior is consistent.
>
>We have not decided to move to RACE yet. However, we have not decided
>to move to nameprep either. Any alternative to RACE, and any
>alternative to nameprep, should have the test in it. When this WG is
>finished, we can remove the unnecessary one.
>
>--Paul Hoffman, Director
>--Internet Mail Consortium
>
>