Progress of 5/6 IDNABIS documents & mappings consistency issue

Vint Cerf vint at
Mon Dec 21 08:22:21 CET 2009

thanks Lisa - i will be working towards a possible resolution
of this last issue over the holidays.

On Dec 20, 2009, at 6:00 PM, Lisa Dusseault wrote:

> As Vint has posted
> ( 
> ),
> we have had good discussions about ß, final sigma, and possible
> transition strategies. These decisions and discussions have been
> reflected in John's recent update to draft-ietf-idnabis-rationale-15.
> Thus, I have put the rationale document, along with
> draft-ietf-idnabis-bidi, draft-ietf-idnabis-defs,
> draft-ietf-idnabis-protocol and draft-ietf-idnabis-tables, on the next
> possible IESG Telechat (Jan 7) for IESG consideration.
> On the topic of mappings, I've previously noted
> ( 
> )
> that we had some IETF Last Call issues raised about how compatible our
> idnabis-mapping list of mappings is with the mappings of IDNA2003.   
> I'd like
> to be sure there's WG consensus on these issues before progressing the
> mappings document.  If some links out there contain characters that  
> were
> required to be mapped in IDNA2003, and software is upgraded to  
> IDNA2008
> in a way that makes those links fail, that seems to be something we  
> should
> be concerned about.  The key issues seem to me to be what the WG  
> opinion
> is on having one set of optional mappings for better  
> interoperability, or two
> or more to encourage flexibility. Michel Suignard's recent message
> ( 
> )
> seems like a good starting point for that discussion.
> I'm hoping despite the holidays we can conclude these discussions in  
> the
> next few weeks, and idnabis-mappings may even be able to catch up with
> the other documents.
> Lisa
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at

More information about the Idna-update mailing list