Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-idn-idna-08.txt

At 02:29 PM 6/10/2002 -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
>I'm neither supporting nor opposing Eric's proposal (intent) at
>this stage, largely because I have yet to get my mind completely
>around enough of the detail of what he is really suggesting to
>understand its implications.  But let me suggest something
>slightly narrower, which I think is consistent with global
>interoperability, in the hope of clarifying the conversation.


Unfortunately, I am remaining highly confused.

The IDNA effort is about domain NAMES.

As nearly as I can tell, this thread is about domain name PARAMETERS, such 
as non-name fields in RRs.  Although this makes for a clearly important 
topic, it is not relevant to IDNA.

As a follow-on effort, to increase the "internationalization" of strings 
used for Internet standards, worrying about non-nameprep issues sounds like 
a dandy topic.

But how, oh how, does it relate to the current set of specifications that 
are seeking standardization.

d/

ps.  you profess to still lack some clarity about this thread.  for a 
thread that has been quite active for 2 weeks, I hope the lack of clarity 
bothers you.


----------
Dave Crocker <mailto:[email protected]>
TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850