mark.davis at icu-project.org
Fri May 23 03:32:57 CEST 2008
I had a number of comments posted some time ago on each of the documents; to
the best of my knowledge you didn't respond on them. It sounds like you want
me (and others like me) to go back and review each new version to see which
have been addressed and which haven't, and revise my comments accordingly.
It would be more effective to respond on the list with commentary as to why
you did or didn't incorporate responses to the comments made.
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 5:32 PM, John C Klensin <klensin at jck.com> wrote:
> For those of you who have not noticed,
> draft-ietf-idnabis-protocol-00 is now posted.
> Draft-ietf-idnabis-rationale-00 was posted the middle of last
> The posted version of "protocol" contains an error (or at least
> unclear text that seems to ban records containing _any_ IDNs in
> the FQDN) in the discussion of SRV records. It has been
> corrected in the working version of the next draft. The
> contextual rules table still needs major work and I need the
> WG's help with that work. I probably won't post -01 until
> there is a bit more of substance in it.
> Could I ask that people take a look at the documents and
> comment, rather than putting energy into debates that are either
> out of scope for the WG or involve nearly pointless speculation
> about how these protocols will be used at the margins? I note
> that there have been no comments at all about "rationale". I
> can't believe that is due to its being perfect or even ready for
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Idna-update