On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 09:57:15AM -0800,
Olaf Kolkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 48 lines which said:
The IAB is ready to ask the RFC-Editor to publish
Design Choices When Expanding DNS
draft-iab-dns-choices-05
I fully agree with the overall message (the use of a
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:26:44AM -0800,
Mark Crispin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 162 lines which said:
The actual correct collation, assuming(!) surname-first collation and
Latin character ordering(!!), is:
...
due to where the surname is located in various cultures.
Is it a
I looked carefully at the proposal of a WG to address the lacks of the IDNA
solution. My evaluation of multilinguist (study regarding the parallel usage
of languages) suggests to me that:
-- The proposed working group does not concern the Multilingual Internet,
but the adaptation of the IDNA
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 09:57:15AM -0800,
Olaf Kolkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 48 lines which said:
The IAB is ready to ask the RFC-Editor to publish
Design Choices When Expanding DNS
draft-iab-dns-choices-05
I fully agree with the overall message
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:52:05AM +1100,
Mark Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 94 lines which said:
So you want to hold up everything because one company
produced a API that was not RFC 1123 compliant?
Read my message before tearing me to pieces :-) I clearly said I
On 4 mar 2008, at 15.13, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
But I regret that the choices of the TXT users are
misrepresented as pure stupidity.
As often said in the IETF: Send text.
I.e. suggest text that you think one can get consensus on.
Patrik
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 04:32:08PM +0200,
Jari Arkko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 21 lines which said:
But it is quite common when we revise a specification that we have
only an incomplete defect list. Or we may not have determined if a
particular
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:52:05AM +1100,
Mark Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 94 lines which said:
So you want to hold up everything because one company
produced a API that was not RFC 1123 compliant?
Read my message before tearing me to pieces :-) I clearly
The IAB tracker indicated this document was dead, now we are told that
publication is imminent. Why?
Do we get to ask the author to address the other proposals that have been made
to address this issue (XPTR) or does it just get published regardless of
whether the claims made are true or not?
On 4 mar 2008, at 16.32, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
I also found the tone of the original paper insulting. I don't think
that 'send text' is an acceptable response to such objections.
For the specific issue, the lack of correct history of why people did
select TXT RR Types my conclusion
I think it would help a lot of people in this thread if we knew what the
subject line meant by 'impending publication'.
I and others made numerous objections to draft-04 which were not responded to.
That draft expired April 26, 2007. I did not continue the conversation because
I believed that
Denis,
Responses are in-line.
spt
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Denis Pinkas
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 9:06 AM
To: Paul Hoffman; Turner, Sean P.; ietf@ietf.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-smime-sha2
At 3:06 PM +0100 3/3/08, Denis Pinkas wrote:
While I welcome this draft, everybody should take into
consideration that, if the SHA2 family happens to be broken
then we will be at risk.
This should be mentioned into the security considerations section.
If an algorithm is cracked then isn't it
Hi Dan,
--On March 2, 2008 11:07:50 PM -0800 Dan Karp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The purpose of sorting in mail clients is so that users can find
messages they're looking for.
Actually you need to look at your use cases in more detail because a lot of
times searching is a much better solution
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
(In some
clients, the sorted list is scrolled to whichever message was previously
selected, so it's a fast way of finding other messages by the same
person).
Yea, I do this frequently in Thunderbird.
As do I.
Note that an address sort that
I agree and will/have address[ed] these in AUTH48.
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
The IESG wrote:
The IESG is considering the following document again now that important
dependencies are ready:
- 'INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - SORT AND THREAD EXTENSIONS'
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Dave Cridland wrote:
Still, though, the presence of useless SORT keys would only be a significant
problem if they were especially difficult to implement, and the large
deployments of SORT indicate that they're not. Even if it's only PINE, that's
still a pretty vast
Stephane Bortzmeyer writes:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:26:44AM -0800,
Mark Crispin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a message of 162 lines which said:
The actual correct collation, assuming(!) surname-first collation
and Latin character ordering(!!), is:
...
due to where the surname is located
- Original Message -
From: Julian Reschke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Tony Finch [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: draft-duerst-iana-namespace-00.txt
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
...
Yes. I suggest
I think it would help a lot of people in this thread if we knew what the
subject line meant by 'impending publication'.
I and others made numerous objections to draft-04 which were not responded to.
That draft expired April 26, 2007. I did not continue the conversation because
I believed that
Tom.Petch wrote:
Hm, we are talking about XML namespace names, not DTD URIs.
XML processors are not supposed to resolve them, so it seems strange to
insert requirements for clients that do so.
Welcome as this is, why is this I-D limited to XML namespace names? What
about
XML Schema
At Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:44:00 -0800,
Paul Hoffman wrote:
At 3:06 PM +0100 3/3/08, Denis Pinkas wrote:
While I welcome this draft, everybody should take into
consideration that, if the SHA2 family happens to be broken
then we will be at risk.
This should be mentioned into the security
Julian Reschke wrote:
Pardon my ignorance, but what is an XML Schema name?
No pardon, but a guess s/name/location/ as in:
xmlns:use=http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance;
use:schemaLocation=http://www.sitemaps.org/schemas/sitemap/0.9
- Original Message -
From: Julian Reschke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tom.Petch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: draft-duerst-iana-namespace-00.txt
Tom.Petch wrote:
Hm, we are talking about XML
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
The actual correct collation, assuming(!) surname-first collation and
Latin character ordering(!!), is:
due to where the surname is located in various cultures.
Is it a good idea to sort on the ordering of the sender's culture? If
the ordering is
On Mar 3, 2008, at 5:38 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
- Separate requirements for valid IDNs at registration time, vs. at
resolution time
This means casting in stone one specific approach, and a dangerous
one.. And the discussions on the existing
idna-update list show that the decision
I've seen just around 10 responses to the external review, plus can
count input prior to the external review. These lead me to conclude
so far that there is support for forming a WG, and there may even be
support for forming this particular WG around this charter with some
changes :)
In
At 5:05 PM -0800 3/4/08, Lisa Dusseault wrote:
Unicode experts have been participating in the work already, so this
is even closer cooperation than having a liaison. If there turns out
to be a need for a liaison, can IAB/liaisons/ADs/chairs do lazy
evaluation then on whether the IETF liaison
Greetings!
The IANA will be holding Office Hours at the IETF-71 in Philadelphia.
This will continue to give everyone an opportunity to discuss IANA
Considerations in your documents, requests for registrations in existing
registries or any other questions you may have.
The IANA will have a table
29 matches
Mail list logo
