New versions of Defs (-01), Protocol (-06), and Rationale (-04)

Vint Cerf vint at google.com
Mon Nov 3 02:18:04 CET 2008


huge thanks, john, for your continued labors on behalf of the WG.

I can but echo John's request for substantive comments early rather  
than later.


vint


NOTE NEW BUSINESS ADDRESS AND PHONE
Vint Cerf
Google
1818 Library Street, Suite 400
Reston, VA 20190
202-370-5637
vint at google.com




On Nov 2, 2008, at 4:58 PM, John C Klensin wrote:

> Hi.
>
> New versions of these three documents will be posted soon --
> queues permitting, the first two soon and the other in some
> hours after I do one last proofreading pass.
>
> I believe these versions reflect all of the changes necessitated
> by Vint's conclusions about consensus.
>
> Please see the change logs and/or generate diffs to understand
> the changes or, preferably, read the documents.
>
> Some general comments:
>
> (1) I am assuming, having gotten no substantive comments on
> Defs-00 since it was posted, that it is generally consistent
> with what the WG was looking for.  If that is not the case, it
> would really help with progress if people spoke up sooner rather
> than later.
>
> (2) Rationale and Protocol have been gone over fairly carefully,
> with a lot of small changes to clarify them and make the
> documents more consistent with each other.  Someone needs to
> check those changes, ideally several someones.
>
> (3) My understanding of the plan about normative material in
> Protocol and Rationale is that there should be no such material
> in the latter and as little explanatory material in Protocol as
> possible, focusing Protocol on the material an implementer needs
> to know to generate a working and interoperable IDNA2008
> implementation.   One corollary to that is that there is no
> place in Protocol for extended advice to registries.
> Consequently, some "advice" material that was suggested for
> Protocol has been incorporated into Rationale.  There is one
> remaining section of Protocol that should probably be moved
> back; it has been identified with a comment and input would be
> appreciated.
>
> If people disagree that the model is "explanatory material and
> advice in Rationale; normative specification, focused on
> implementers in Protocol", it would help progress a lot if they
> would speak up soon and accompany their comments with a model
> from which material can be categorized.
>
> (4) There is a new, but still very rough, section (7.2) in
> Rationale that addresses the transition issues with Final Sigma
> and Eszett.    I do not believe it is finished or even nearly
> final, but thought that having some text, in context, for people
> to examine and make comments on would help us move forward.
>
>       john
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20081102/532d91dd/attachment.htm 


More information about the Idna-update mailing list