Re: [idn] time to move

["D. J. Bernstein" <djb@cr.yp.to>]

> > How exactly are we supposed to respond to this poll?
> Why are you asking such a question after you already sent in your own
> response?

The only choices provided were ``agree with retaining the IDNA technical
approach'' and ``disagree with pursuing IDNA and, instead, feel that an
alternative approach should be pursued.''

The poll didn't provide any way to say ``evaluate the options carefully;
this is a major decision; moving right now is premature.''

I sent a ``disagree'' response because it seems that the poll-takers
will interpret ``agree'' responses as a reason to rush forward without
considering the facts. But the fact that I've sent a response doesn't
mean that I'm happy with the form of the poll.

> Your making such an assertion suggests that you have already done such a 
> survey, unbeknownst to the rest of the working group.

I'm paying attention to the messages on the mailing list. Are you?

> > We find
> > it worrisome that the centerpiece of the IDNA ``design philosophy'' is a
> > statement about DNS servers that has turned out to be completely wrong.
> What statement is that?

``To date, the proposals for IDN protocols have required that DNS
servers be updated to handle internationalized host names.''

---Dan