IDNCANN

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

On 12/28/09 8:06 PM, Patrick Suger wrote:
> 2009/12/28 <nicolas1.krebs3 at netcourrier.com
> <mailto:nicolas1.krebs3 at netcourrier.com>>
>
>     Marie-France Berny wrote:
>
>      > Transition is also towards a new namespace where ICANN will not
>     be the only
>      > global core reference.
>
>     What are you talking about?


Non-singularity has been a fact since November, 2001. Ms. Berny is 8 
years behind on her reading. On the bright side, she's not offering, 
today at any rate, to lecture on mathematics.


> About the Internet reality this WG has now technically confirmed the
> capacity.The transition from the default legacy to the Multi-[lingual,
> lateral, technology, namespace, presentation, class, national, cultural,
> etc. etc.] Internet.


IETF Working Groups technically confirm documents. A lot of them are 
without significance, even for non-specialists.

While IDNI (note the "I") could have resulted in an infrastructure 
transition, or at least, the adoption of an infrastructure already 
deployed where the problem existed, but not where it was defined, or 
solved, for local values of "definition" and "solution", IDNA and 
IDNAbis merely provide a presentation layer feature set on an 
unchanged infrastructure.

To restate, if what IDNA achieved is the laundry list offered by the 
exuberant Mr. Suger, then each of those is merely a presentation layer 
feature set, and each is trivially equivalent to any other 
presentation layer feature set.


> As Rod Beckstrom put-it, the Internet is going to change for the first
> time in 40 years. Switching from English ASCII passive content
> prototyping to full multi-lingual active content services operations.
> This is not a small thing. We are better to help people prepare for it.


I don't have any reason to think Mr. Beckstrom has gotten his sea legs 
yet, or has the reach of the problem, of which is this but a part, in 
his grasp. I recall clearly that it took me nearly a year to frame my 
problems, first writing the First European Unix Standard, and several 
years later writing the Global Unix Standard, each in competitive, 
multi-lateral, large industrial sector contexts, and each time with 
committed opposition, first AT&T, and then MicroSoft. I don't think 
his current billet any simpler.

Rod is no authority, and quoting him as if he were an authority is the 
weakest argument to offer.

He's going to make mistakes, like any new XO.

Eric