Re: [idn] WG last call summary

["Soobok Lee" <lsb@postel.co.kr>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "D. J. Bernstein" <djb@cr.yp.to>
To: <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Cc: <ietf@ietf.org>; <iesg@ietf.org>; <iab@isi.edu>
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: [idn] WG last call summary


> Marc Blanchet writes:
> > We will be sending the documents for IESG consideration for Proposed 
> > Standard on March 11th 2002.
> 
> That's outrageous. IDNA has received strong written objections from at
> least fifteen regular WG participants and _hundreds_ of other people.
> IDNA will cause a tremendous amount of damage, including bounced email,
> web link failures, widespread user confusion, and massive costs---much
> higher than necessary---for software development and deployment.
> 
> You say that you are obliged to ignore all these objections because the
> IDN WG has to _do something_. But the IETF procedures don't say ``It's
> okay to make an incredibly destructive modification to the Internet
> protocol suite if you have to _do something_.''

I agree with you.
I believe IESG+IAB wouldn't be a rubber stamp this time.

> 
> I hope that the IDN WG can settle on a safe course of action. However,
> until that happens, we will have to stick to the status quo.
> 
> ---D. J. Bernstein, Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics,
> Statistics, and Computer Science, University of Illinois at Chicago