--On Tuesday, March 15, 2005 5:53 PM -0800 Erik van der Poel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Martin v. L�wis wrote:What is much more relevant is how further constraints in the registry (beyond those imposed by IDNA) get implemented. Only when that is sufficiently settled and deployed, considering *updates* to IDNA should start.
I disagree. The IETF should not wait for any of the registries to do anything before publishing new drafts or RFCs. The registries are not the only other players here. We have application developers and zone administrators depending on our work too.
Yes.
And let me add one observation. At the moment, "the registries" (remember that there are around 275 of them) are going in every direction possible. ICANN's guidance, based to some extent on the advice that IESG gave them, is so vague as to permit almost any interpretation, clearly doesn't work for some important cases (encouraging even more interpretations), and is being outright ignored by some ccTLDs. If we want the registries to do something, we are going to need to provide some more specific guidance and we are going to need to document why it is a good idea. The same observation applies to application writers: unless we actually change the standard (the algorithms or the tables), all we are doing is offering advice. That advice will probably be taken if it is clear and well-reasoned and the reasoning is well- explained justified. And, in both cases, it will be easier to persuade people to make changes before they have an installed base that has to be forced to adjust to new ways of doing things. The more deployment occurs before we make suggestions or change things, the more likely whatever we do will be ignored.
john
