"Adam M. Costello" wrote: > > "Eric A. Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I think that it is probably also feasible to adopt a "continuation" > > syntax in ACE as part of a backwards compatibility. > > This has been proposed before. It's certainly a clever idea, but > it's not clear that it wouldn't create more compatibility problems. Yeah, very difficult. This has been what's been keeping my own dual-mode draft from being finished. You raised some good points, but the one that has me bugged is the max length; providing continuation labels just moves the problem to the max length restriction, rather than really fixing it. -- Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/ Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/
- [idn] Who supports UDNS (ACE+UTF-8... Dan
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... Edmon
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... John C Klensin
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... Eric A. Hall
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... Adam M. Costello
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... Eric A. Hall
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... Marc Blanchet
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... James Seng/Personal
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... deng
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... Eric A. Hall
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... Mark . Andrews
- Re: [idn] Who supports UDNS (... Edmon
