> -----Original Message-----
> From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[email protected]>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2020 2:51 PM
> To: The IESG <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; regext-
> [email protected]; [email protected]; Hollenbeck, Scott
> <[email protected]>; Hollenbeck, Scott
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-regext-dnrd-
> objects-mapping-09: (with COMMENT)
>
> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-regext-dnrd-objects-mapping-09: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email
> addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory
> paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://secure-
> web.cisco.com/1W4L5pJ3TyJndjeWWepPJ0FYUtskoZH25tdV9KSXxHJKAETOV
> VLYUrU9UwS7IpMbffNuBMRr1FoqkK_AYGSpMMbXvLodTA9tzoICBUI-
> 2Nrnx6Mf9mkb0ye4qkvDMQvgWbHEXwz247RE03vC3Gfp85STTZtv9c_qSjk1p
> 3Ey6vKdCH_yMR3NY23wgcbc2_2Tn73FHz645-DCJd9ESo517r3St_DvzzdIU9-
> Hq-
> 84c6j6PQg_36CgAhz6SnQuEWo6_/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fiesg%2
> Fstatement%2Fdiscuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://secure-web.cisco.com/1LRZMVfz2P0-
> h9j7TBvAwsFXMfUmCjMvn9KguyOcseMpn2W7tiUjymb5xH2qfaIpi5XewFNIu
> 4VCP3iOduGLdFWkFmDFdUt8Z0rgLZSOxVYuRO_HmgQNvVBNAmhVBsQiT2s
> XlX3LQqqvpb0YZD9uxKfwyxuXhcfyIZeK4rG89aUTrsRj-W4foUixOz0Ht-
> uMZUgluC7kTtKsJOxNLotmtrvEKcQb89w8fz2m6c3xCsPa8JK0j4Lfzw_EAOcRpj
> axWJd6divcDTEFjbWpZpS82jg/https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc
> %2Fdraft-ietf-regext-dnrd-objects-mapping%2F
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thank you for the work put into this document. Due to my heavy workload, I
> did not review in details the model itself.
>
> Please find below a couple of non-blocking COMMENTs (a reply to  my
> COMMENTs will be welcome).
>
> I hope that this helps to improve the document,
>
> Regards,
>
> -éric
>
> == COMMENTS ==
>
> A generic question about the point (5) of the document shepherd write-up:
> "The AD is asking for further review from the Internationalization
> Directorate, specifically on Section 10, which RECOMMENDS UTF-8 but allows
> UTF-16.  The working group cites RFC 5730, Section 5, and aligns with that.
> The AD would prefer to deprecate UTF-16, and notes that RFC 5730, is now
> well over 10 years old.  Other opinions will be useful."
>
> Did the WG receive any other opinions ? It is not clear from the write-up.

I didn't see any opinions expressed, or anything being requested of the i18n 
directorate..

Scott (the document shepherd)

_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Reply via email to