my comments on draft-ietf-idnabis-protocol-14 (second part)

[John C Klensin]

--On Tuesday, September 01, 2009 19:19 -0400 Vint Cerf
<vint at google.com> wrote:

> John,
> 
> thanks for this.
> 
> Martin,
> 
> can you be persuaded to go along with the -15 version that
> John is   releasing, even if it does not contain all the
> editorial   recommendations you have made? John's point about
> pace and delay are   relevant here (to me anyway) since we are
> now racing the clock to get   this into IESG queue and also to
> get final documents reported to RFC   editor for publication
> before ICANN has to move on with IDN TLD   registrations.

Vint, Martin,

For whatever it is worth, I'm anxious enough to see this stuff
progress at a least to Draft Standard that I'm willing to commit
to going to work on that version of the text as soon as this
stuff is signed off and on its way to the RFC Editor.  Actually
moving to that point will, of  course, require interoperability
demonstrations and updating of the other documents (and does not
require the WG unless Lisa and Alexey insist), but I see no
reason why we shouldn't have I-Ds with these sorts of changes
posted within a few weeks after the IESG hands the present set
off to the RFC Editor.

    john