Return-Path: X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 862E312086C; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 07:37:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m4ALQyoxctSD; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 07:37:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ot1-x331.google.com (mail-ot1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::331]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFD2212085A; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 07:37:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x331.google.com with SMTP id w4so6115909ote.11; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 07:37:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ycW0rKldEue+DEhnDhDcJ213ocVzOFQfX22R8EfgaOY=; b=IpA71eOPbYt+9P18egCxHW3gZ6CYKrsMEcnEExfxNlPI3bxcCg3uml7vHDqrc8dCGU uSZG+kIkkTqYVvDnlQQbABkat95MBIemtYpiRH+TrrzD80CvqfIGBa9s0Pa2lc0Gyzv2 xjx3q5h3yUjW0ZK300yFgxf3vwKwI+agby4i2xUdqgVljcMcehaZ7OSMg9wOwsJJq/Cp aUvFPZoA9rOq4Sj1XdtCCW9FhahzVIPh2V9Vri5Nti8K/i18zVU/eFZ7pkJyW52MLljl 0mYDVEbuW+jtOwf11desz2Q5oEkFwN1p0gnNea3fRcjGIevRfwaRBxOtayx2vLBRylWc LVkA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ycW0rKldEue+DEhnDhDcJ213ocVzOFQfX22R8EfgaOY=; b=n62re44AhdbggHGei4JxahBRucCP2nyvks+vuuDvHE87dadxxfs14W8QmailMk74U5 Ak4UlRYJBNsHNUAxeyyYi2+a2sMAPR7BW/T0m7iBVIC+tjcIS2d40Mb9G8DE7BouZSWK KjO5L+GYJm7FE0tty6QYgHBgEbc324Bt4xze4TzzZl2DqNcUftFHGbUcwWpT9BK+4jZt ir5B6+VNemrw9PXk6623oR0shTrXzv1y/1fk7wn/WcwhFL386MUYjWjhpzaorFDSQsu5 m6Jx3r55EEDSGmtmBjwlzyfEYu/YHrjGTcUJ4AC2QvRDMwVvamxgSw7DkLdUuYfZVfNL uL8Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWOmfwBUr0Ra3kgOzLEbsM93xz6T1v4amT6jkJYRzStmz3Qz18z ptNCVnG1P3ruu60pQKJ97AIEsvWfVIM47EcnFWc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwyOiRuX4d0XhPoeQF+x1vBYjDqurgbI3NVe/IMDRufVKDUTacdkJ1RJJcnUpdVJPkenvUjJkw2Cjt4kY0t3fQ= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:f711:: with SMTP id k17mr38907888iog.273.1565707024892; Tue, 13 Aug 2019 07:37:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <156570496017.24103.10968169166797701286@ietfa.amsl.com> <6CC56B4CB3D8BF314E8F373F@PSB> In-Reply-To: <6CC56B4CB3D8BF314E8F373F@PSB> From: Vijay Gurbani Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 09:37:08 -0500 Message-ID: To: John C Klensin Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-klensin-idna-rfc5891bis.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000a87ca059000933d" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-klensin-idna-rfc5891bis-04 X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 14:37:08 -0000 --0000000000000a87ca059000933d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear John: Thank you for attending to my comments. More inline. On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 9:17 AM John C Klensin wrote: > > --On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 07:02 -0700 Vijay Gurbani via > Datatracker wrote: > > [...] > - Section 2, last paragraph: "By necessity, the latter ...", > > here, "latter" probably > > refers to "protocol restrictions". However, I am not sure > > whether the rest of the sentence ("...the latter are somewhat > > generic, having to ...") refers to protocol restrictions or > > registry restrictions. It seems to me that the rest of the > > sentence is referring to registry restrictions, in which case, > > s/latter/former/. > > Actually not. I've replaced "latter" with "protocol > restrictions" so as to eliminate the confusing reference > entirely. OK, that works by making the intent more explicit. What should be clear from the rest of the document > (and, more important, from 5890 - 5894 themselves) is that the > protocol restrictions are the least restrictive and allow the > largest number of code points. Other restrictions and > guidelines are intermediate to registry restrictions and > typically exclude larger numbers of code points and labels (but > cannot allow code points the protocol restrictions disallowed). > And the individual registry restrictions are the most > restrictive of all. Right, I did get that sense from reading the document, however ... > For a particularly registry, they might > even include a restriction that labels in that particular zone > be words in an authoritative dictionary, a restriction that > would make little sense for many zones. If that isn't clear > after you have carefully reread this I-D and the base IDNA > specifications, please speak up because it would suggest the > IETF has work to do (not necessarily in this I-D). > ... since I do not participate in the IDNA work, I am unaware of the associated arcana (code points such CONTEXT{J,O}, MSR-4, etc.) used in the domain. As such, I am evaluating the I-D as a generalist GEN-ART reviewer, and not one steeped in the art of IDNA. From that perspective, many constructs in the I-D escape my appreciation, but I suspect that the review process does guarantee that the IDNA folks get to see the work, and I am convinced that the manuscript makes eminent sense to them. > > - Section 8: s/Faltstrom/Falstrom/ > The correct spelling of his name is "F=C3=A4ltstr=C3=B6m". This > confused me because it appeared that you were asking to drop the > first "t". But there was an error in the reference and your > notation above is apparently merely backwards. Fixed in the > working copy -- thanks. > Great, thanks. Much appreciate your time, John. - vijay --0000000000000a87ca059000933d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear John: Thank you for attending to my comments.=C2= =A0 More inline.

On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 9:17 AM John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
=

--On Tuesday, August 13, 2019 07:02 -0700 Vijay Gurbani via
Datatracker <norep= ly@ietf.org> wrote:

[...]=C2=A0
> - Section 2, last paragraph: "By necessity, the latter ...&quo= t;,
> here, "latter" probably
>=C2=A0 refers to "protocol restrictions".=C2=A0 However, I am= not sure
> whether the rest of=C2=A0 the sentence ("...the latter are somewh= at
> generic, having to ...") refers to=C2=A0 protocol restrictions or=
> registry restrictions.=C2=A0 It seems to me that the rest=C2=A0 of the=
> sentence is referring to registry restrictions, in which case,
>=C2=A0 s/latter/former/.

Actually not.=C2=A0 I've replaced "latter" with "protoco= l
restrictions" so as to eliminate the confusing reference
entirely.=C2=A0

OK, that works by making t= he intent more explicit.

What should be clear from the rest of the document
(and, more important, from 5890 - 5894 themselves) is that the
protocol restrictions are the least restrictive and allow the
largest number of code points.=C2=A0 Other restrictions and
guidelines are intermediate to registry restrictions and
typically exclude larger numbers of code points and labels (but
cannot allow code points the protocol restrictions disallowed).
And the individual registry restrictions are the most
restrictive of all.=C2=A0

Right, I did get= that sense from reading the document, however ...
=C2=A0
For a particularly regi= stry, they might
even include a restriction that labels in that particular zone
be words in an authoritative dictionary, a restriction that
would make little sense for many zones.=C2=A0 If that isn't clear
after you have carefully reread this I-D and the base IDNA
specifications, please speak up because it would suggest the
IETF has work to do (not necessarily in this I-D).
... since I do not participate in the IDNA work, I am unaware o= f the associated arcana (code points such CONTEXT{J,O}, MSR-4, etc.) used i= n the domain.=C2=A0 As such, I am evaluating the I-D as a generalist GEN-AR= T reviewer, and not one steeped in the art of IDNA.=C2=A0 From that perspec= tive, many constructs in the I-D escape my appreciation, but I suspect that= the review process does guarantee that the IDNA folks get to see the work,= and I am convinced that the manuscript makes eminent sense to them.
=C2=A0
> - Section 8: s/Faltstrom/Falstrom/
The correct spelling of his name is "F=C3=A4ltstr=C3=B6m".=C2=A0 = This
confused me because it appeared that you were asking to drop the
first "t".=C2=A0 =C2=A0But there was an error in the reference an= d your
notation above is apparently merely backwards.=C2=A0 Fixed in the
working copy -- thanks.

Great, thanks.= =C2=A0

Much appreciate your time, John.
=

- vijay
--0000000000000a87ca059000933d--