Re: [idn] draft-skwan-utf8-dns-05.txt

["James Seng/Personal" <James@Seng.cc>]

hi guys,

before this goes on further into a bashing session,

1. stuart is just doing updating to keep the I-D 'alive' every 6months.
   as such, i think -05 is not very different from the -04.

2. stuart did ask if he should publish this as the WG I-D.
   unfortunately, that was after the cut-off date for new I-D
   so we told him to publish it as individual I-D first.

   Given this discussion, I suggest Stuart do a major review of his
   I-D before submitting it again to the WG.

*cheers*

-James Seng

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian W. Spolarich" <briansp@walid.com>
To: "David C Lawrence" <tale@nominum.com>; <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 1:12 AM
Subject: RE: [idn] draft-skwan-utf8-dns-05.txt


>
>   So this is the sixth version of this draft?
>
>   It certainly hasn't gotten any better, and skwan, et. al. continue
to ignore
> the nameprep-related issues, and apparently don't give a hoot about
> interoperability with the larger world.
>
>   I'd like to hear from the authors why they think nameprep is not
important.
> Given the variety of IMEs that are available on the various Win32
platforms
> and MS's fairly strong position wrt i18n, I would figure they've
encountered
> the 'sequences that look the same but aren't' problem.
>
>   -bws
>
>
>