Eszett and IDNAv2 vs IDNA2008

Ebw ebw at
Fri Mar 20 14:47:30 CET 2009


Lots of working groups recharter.

I'm not advocating, but the process step in your earlier mail (to BoF)  
surprised me.


Sent from my iPhone, painfully.

On Mar 20, 2009, at 8:37 AM, Vint Cerf <vint at> wrote:

> Simon perhaps we are not too far apart. Re-charter, as I understand
> it, would involve the same kind of community consensus building that a
> BOF does.
> Before we come to the conclusion that we need new prefix, new
> charters, etc, I would sure like to have an assessment of the
> implications of adopting the present specifications. We already know
> there are some backward incompatibilities and I believe this was
> understood going into the WG in the first place. The question is how
> these can be addressed and whether the solutions are considered
> acceptable.
> v
> Vint Cerf
> Google
> 1818 Library Street, Suite 400
> Reston, VA 20190
> 202-370-5637
> vint at
> On Mar 20, 2009, at 9:28 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> Vint Cerf <vint at> writes:
>>> Folks,
>>> introduction of a new prefix at this late stage strikes me as a non-
>>> starter. It is proving hard enough to deal with the issues on the
>>> table associated with the xn-- prefix. What we need to do is to
>>> evaluate essentially the present IDNA2008 specification and
>>> understand
>>> implications and transition issues associated with its introduction.
>> I agree, but maybe for different reasons.
>> If the IDNA2008 protocol introduces backwards incompatible changes

More information about the Idna-update mailing list