> This is a dead horse that is not, IMO, worth kicking. BCP did > not exist at the time, and probably would not have been used > anyway.
Correct. Things have changed. 954 has UNKNOWN as a status, which is pretty funny, given all the heat surrounding that subject. However, 2606 is a product of the IETF, and 1591 isn't. ... > respects, far more authority than "standards". Standards were > voluntary; compliance, at the top level, with IANA policy > statements was mandatory, as many people, yourself included if I > recall, who tried to obtain top-level "country code" domains for > entities not on the 3166 list found out. Indians have been trying to get into .int, and have been getting into .com, before Jon and I began a conversation unfortunately terminated prematurely. I wouldn't consider the IANA policy mandatory, simply expensive to ignore. The alternate-rooters were all keen to have Indians, even some Indians were keen to act autonomously, but we're a fairly neighbor-respecting lot, and patient. > So the hair-splitting you are attempting here really does not > usefully work, IMO. Let's stick to the technical please, either 0x33, prepended by, and/or postfixed by 0xe2, is or isn't something. Now if you want to really fix this "problem", just fix 2929. > Yes. But ignoring the apps gets the IDN WG into a silly state > (and has, already, several times). So for a change, lets ignore the dns. Oh, that's been tried here too. > john eric
