ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: ietf-822 Non-sub: Re (fwd)

2003-02-07 12:58:54

This is being resent for the IETF-822 wg's benefit because the original
was only 'half-delivered' due to that list blocking initial mails by
non-subscribers (didn't usefor get chewed out by the IETF for doing that a
couple of years ago?). My apologies to those on usefor who have already
seen it

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 12:06:24 -0800 (PST)
From: Benjamin Franz <snowhare(_at_)nihongo(_dot_)org>
To: usenet-format(_at_)landfield(_dot_)com
cc: ietf-822(_at_)imc(_dot_)org, <news(_at_)dankohn(_dot_)com>
Subject: Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-kohn-news-article-00.txt
In-Reply-To: 
<138AA78F80DCE84B8EE424399FFBF9C904FA85(_at_)exchange(_dot_)ad(_dot_)skymv(_dot_)com>
Message-ID: 
<Pine(_dot_)LNX(_dot_)4(_dot_)44(_dot_)0302061158450(_dot_)7069-100000(_at_)high-mountain(_dot_)nihongo(_dot_)org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Dan Kohn wrote:

 This will require 7-bit encoding of i18n characters, likely using RFC
 2047/2231 and/or nameprep+punycode (as with IDNA).  The general approach
 will be the one laid out in
 <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kohn-news-article-00.txt>.

Stop.

Really.

It is simply an attempt to hijack a working group via manipulation of IETF
procedure. It would set a precedent that *everyone* in the IETF would live
to regret.

"Don't like what someone's working group is producing? Recharter them to
force the decisions you want in the charter! Fun and games for the whole
family!"

--
Benjamin Franz

"Hey! I have an idea! Let's recharter IETF-822 to require binary
transparent operation!"


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>