Consensus Call Tranche 8 Results

[Simon Josefsson]

Jaap Akkerhuis <jaap at NLnetLabs.nl> writes:

>     Do you have a better proposal?
>
> No, I don't have a proposal at all. I also don't have a good idea
> what people want to solve anyway. I'm just warning for possible
> consequences of what is proposed here.

I agree, but the only way to avoid all of those consequences appears to
be to avoid backwards incompatible changes.  It seems that the majority
of WG participants, including the document authors, already support
making some backwards incompatible changes.  Thus, the problem is to
describe how things can be deployed with the lowest costs.

"YAO Jiankang" <yaojk at cnnic.cn> writes:

>>> do you think that sending two DNS queries for the incompatible
>>> characters can work?  if so, we must update all DNS resolver to
>>> support this idea? do you think that it is practicable?
>> 
>> Do you have a better proposal?
>
> I have no better proposal. so it is better to still keep to use the
> current prefix. do not change it!

What about ezset and other backwards incompatible changes then?  You
need to describe how they should be handled.

/Simon