Harald,
I'm lost, what BOF are you talking about?
Cullen
On Mar 4, 2008, at 6:19 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
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
Cullen Jennings skrev:
Harald,
I'm lost, what BOF are you talking about?
This one:
*WEDNESDAY, March 12, 2008 *
*0900-1130 Morning Session I *
Franklin 6/7APP idn Internationalized Domain Name BOF
http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/08mar/agenda/idn.txt
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 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
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 09:57:35AM -0800,
The IESG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
a message of 108 lines which said:
Please send your comments to the IESG mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
by March 4, 2008.
That's one week only, for the charter of a group which may change an
important Standards
On 3 mar 2008, at 14.38, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
Hold on. Is the WG really supposed to work on perceived defects?
Either these defects are real or they are not. If they are not real,
for instance, if they are FUD (this is quite common in the IDN arena),
they should *not* be addressed by
Stephane,
In addition, experience has shown a number of real or perceived
defects or inadequacies with the protocol.
Hold on. Is the WG really supposed to work on perceived defects?
Either these defects are real or they are not. If they are not real,
for instance, if they are FUD
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 issue is really a defect.
