IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] the same in old days, was making names the same NEED protocol changes?

Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net> Mon, 28 February 2011 19:50 UTC

Return-Path: <ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net>
X-Original-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84C473A6C69 for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:50:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.414
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.414 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.185, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sPp0CQJsUsZT for <dnsext@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:50:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from abenaki.wabanaki.net (abenaki.wabanaki.net [65.99.1.133]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F8CF3A6C59 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:50:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from limpet.local (cpe-67-255-5-237.twcny.res.rr.com [67.255.5.237]) by abenaki.wabanaki.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p1SI3OTF030305; Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:03:25 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net)
Message-ID: <4D6BFCA0.80806@abenaki.wabanaki.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 14:50:56 -0500
From: Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net>
Organization: wampumpeag
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <20110227182720.6537.qmail@joyce.lan> <552AB7D12FAB50296E795CF5@Ximines.local> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102271336340.6604@joyce.lan> <AF3A2DE418832E7A91CD07A5@Ximines.local> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1102271457570.7355@joyce.lan> <AANLkTi=DLzBEQFLqAmPccbdt63LDSp1cRzShnYkuiDQB@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikJvkK27huT0FSQ=1DF2HS1hwUS3TL1u988h8gN@mail.gmail.com> <4D6BE4D6.3030103@abenaki.wabanaki.net> <AANLkTimaSvbs00TCevsPH5ZX43TzuPk7VXO7Fo3qFdhM@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimaSvbs00TCevsPH5ZX43TzuPk7VXO7Fo3qFdhM@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] the same in old days, was making names the same NEED protocol changes?
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:50:07 -0000

do you seriously think phillip was contemplating playing shuttlecock 
with a pair of labels, one GB, one Big5?

i didn't.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email