Charter, changes in prefixes, and documentation

Vint Cerf vint at
Wed Mar 26 08:47:23 CET 2008

Generally I hope we can focus on the present developed documents and discuss these. Too much effort in charter seems like putting effort in the less productive area. If there is not wide consensus on the material developed already by the design team, the charter is in some sense the least of our worries.

Taking john klensin's section below into account is there a complete draft we can circulate now and agree upon? I am eager to move ahead with the substantive work. V

----- Original Message -----
From: idna-update-bounces at <idna-update-bounces at>
To: John C Klensin <klensin at>; idna-update at <idna-update at>
Sent: Wed Mar 26 00:30:54 2008
Subject: Re: Charter, changes in prefixes, and documentation

At 09:18 08/03/26, John C Klensin wrote:

>(1) As far as the charter is concerned, let's be explicit about
>this.  Rather than scattering language and restrictions
>throughout the charter, let's make an explicit subsection that
>says something like 
>       The WG will stop, close, and recommend that a new
>       charter be generated if it concludes that any of the
>       following are necessary to meet its goals:
>               (i) A change to the "punycode" algorithm or the ACE
>               approach to encoding names in the DNS
>               (ii) A change to the ACE prefix from "xn--"
>               (iii) A change to the basic approach taken in the design
>               team documents.

I agree with Mark that (iii) is a bit fuzzy. I'm fine to leave
it this way unless there is an understanding (especially by John)
that e.g. the new prohibition on trying to resolve names with
forbidden characters is included in (iii).

[In my opinion, the prohibition against trying to resolve names
with forbidden characters is one change amongst many, not strongly
related to the other changes. I don't think we need to discuss whether
this is so or not just now, I just want to the assurance that if
the WG comes to the conclusion that this is so, then there still
is no need to recharter. In more general terms, I want (iii) to
be taken rather too loose than too strict.]

Regards,    Martin.

#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-#-#       mailto:duerst at     

Idna-update mailing list
Idna-update at

More information about the Idna-update mailing list