----- Original Message ----- From: "D. J. Bernstein" <djb@cr.yp.to> To: <idn@ops.ietf.org> Cc: <ietf@ietf.org>; <iesg@ietf.org>; <iab@isi.edu> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 12:58 PM Subject: Re: [idn] WG last call summary > Marc Blanchet writes: > > We will be sending the documents for IESG consideration for Proposed > > Standard on March 11th 2002. > > That's outrageous. IDNA has received strong written objections from at > least fifteen regular WG participants and _hundreds_ of other people. > IDNA will cause a tremendous amount of damage, including bounced email, > web link failures, widespread user confusion, and massive costs---much > higher than necessary---for software development and deployment. > > You say that you are obliged to ignore all these objections because the > IDN WG has to _do something_. But the IETF procedures don't say ``It's > okay to make an incredibly destructive modification to the Internet > protocol suite if you have to _do something_.'' I agree with you. I believe IESG+IAB wouldn't be a rubber stamp this time. > > I hope that the IDN WG can settle on a safe course of action. However, > until that happens, we will have to stick to the status quo. > > ---D. J. Bernstein, Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics, > Statistics, and Computer Science, University of Illinois at Chicago