--On Friday, 17 May, 2002 11:00 +0900 Soobok Lee
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dynamic DNS Update (RFC2137) features allow some
> similar/identically-looking IDN ACE labels to be inserted
> without any intervention from human administrators.
> IDN-administration draft efforts, most of which have focus on
> the idn REGISTRATION, may be ignoring those
> protocol/security/architectural issues. ACE labels are to be
> treated and trusted as ASCII ones but it shouldn't . That will
> be a great blow to the stability,trustworthiness and security
> of global DNS systems.
I don't know quite how to say this politely, but, so? More
specifically and to review the procedures as I understand them:
* If you think this is an argument that the current
drafts should not be approved, or even subject to an
IETF Last Call, try to convince the ADs. If they
ignore you and issue a Last Call anyway, you could
presumably appeal their decision, although (speaking as
an individual), I wouldn't particularly recommend that.
* If you believe when an IETF Last Call opens that there
are important issues that the WG had declined, or been
unable, to address effectively, you should raise the
issues --forcefully and with good and specific
documentation-- at that point. If you conclude that
there is no adequate response, you have the right to use
the appeal mechanism at that stage.
* If you believe that there are technical issues that
should be addressed in a WG, you should propose an
appropriate WG with an appropriate charter. It seems
very clear to me that the current IDN group, having not
been willing to address these issues in the past (at
least partially because many people believe they are not
within the charter), is not going to address them in
useful ways in the future.
But the current WG, I believe, should be around long enough to
get the documents that are now in front of the IESG finished,
and then should be shut down rather than looking for new tasks
or picking up discarded ones.
Just my opinion.
john
