At 09:16 PM 6/7/2002 +0900, Soobok Lee wrote:
Your above defense of premature and lacking-of-consensus IDN standards
If you review the amount of time spent on developing this work, you will
discover that it is a long way from premature. Quite the contrary. The
work has gone on approximately two years longer than it needed to.
If you review the usual IETF processes for developing rough consensus, you
will discover that IDN is a long way from lacking rough consensus. In fact
the process has continued beyond achieving adequate rough consensus,
because the IETF has been heeding the concerns of a vocal minority of the
community, where most of the concerns of that vocal minority concern
technical issues that are outside of the scope of this working group.
I hope you Dave share with us serious concerns about how to secure DNS from
irreversible jeopardizations by commercial driving forces of IDN.
We heard similar hyperbole about MIME.
It failed to prove true then. It will fail to prove true for IDN.
IDN is a careful, focused response to a specific problem with DNS character
sets. IDN correctly limits its scope to the solution of that character set
Dave Crocker <mailto:dave(_at_)tribalwise(_dot_)com>
TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850