Erik van der Poel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>>>Everyone can submit their own update of RFC >>>>3454 to the IETF and advocate for their proposal. I don't care >>>>strongly which solution is chosen, if there is a good migration plan >>>>to the new idea. Meanwhile, implementors will route around the damage >>>>and pick their own solutions. >>> >>> OK, let's suppose just for the moment, that we decide to have >>> Stringprep point to version 24 or higher of UAX #15. Can you think >>> of a migration plan that would satisfy ultra-conservative >>> implementors like yourself? >> The spec could suggest that all problem sequences are to be >> rejected. > > One way is to have more than one Internet Draft from individuals, and > another way is to have a single draft that lists all the alternatives > and discusses pros and cons of each. I guess the latter approach is > sometimes used by working groups, but we don't currently have a > Stringprep working group. Thoughts?
I don't think a working group is required to do this work. I believe updates of older standards are sometimes done outside a working group. Having a draft outlining the alternatives would be a useful contribution. Could be a first step towards producing a single draft incorporating a solution. Thanks, Simon
