IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [idn] Overspecifications in draft-ietf-idn-requirements-08

"James Seng/Personal" <jseng@pobox.org.sg> Tue, 16 October 2001 06:45 UTC

Received: from psg.com (exim@psg.com [147.28.0.62]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA05554 for <idn-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Oct 2001 02:45:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from lserv by psg.com with local (Exim 3.33 #1) id 15tNaS-000ID1-00 for idn-data@psg.com; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 23:20:24 -0700
Received: from mail.i-dns.net ([203.126.116.228]) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 15tNaR-000ICr-00 for idn@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2001 23:20:23 -0700
Received: from jamessonyvaio (hs0987.singnet.com.sg [165.21.201.45]) by mail.i-dns.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 70B74FFC09; Tue, 16 Oct 2001 14:20:37 +0800 (SGT)
Message-ID: <001401c1560a$9b5d01b0$c3d715a5@jamessonyvaio>
From: James Seng/Personal <jseng@pobox.org.sg>
To: David Hopwood <david.hopwood@zetnet.co.uk>, idn@ops.ietf.org
References: <3BC28B99.E4E7CFB0@zetnet.co.uk> <3BC49CF4.6A1690D6@zetnet.co.uk> <030701c15202$0742e000$dd00a8c0@jamessonyvaio>
Subject: Re: [idn] Overspecifications in draft-ietf-idn-requirements-08
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 13:40:01 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
Sender: owner-idn@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Let me put it more correctly:

The document is currently under AD review thus it isnt a good idea to
issues an updated draft at this time. However, in the interest of
getting rough consensus, these comments will be taken into account.

-James Seng

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Seng/Personal" <jseng@pobox.org.sg>
To: "David Hopwood" <david.hopwood@zetnet.co.uk>; <idn@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: [idn] Overspecifications in draft-ietf-idn-requirements-08


> I would say more likely the door is already closed on requirements
since
> we already move it forward. But you never know what would happen...
>
> -James Seng
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Hopwood" <david.hopwood@zetnet.co.uk>
> To: <idn@ops.ietf.org>
> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 3:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [idn] Overspecifications in
draft-ietf-idn-requirements-08
>
>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >
> > I see that there have been no comments on my suggested changes to
> > draft-ietf-idn-requirements-08.txt. Is that because no-one disagrees
> > with them, or because no-one has looked at them closely?
> >
> > - --
> > David Hopwood <david.hopwood@zetnet.co.uk>
> >
> > Home page & PGP public key: http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hopwood/
> > RSA 2048-bit; fingerprint 71 8E A6 23 0E D3 4C E5  0F 69 8C D4 FA 66
> 15 01
> > Nothing in this message is intended to be legally binding. If I
revoke
> a
> > public key but refuse to specify why, it is because the private key
> has been
> > seized under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act; see
> www.fipr.org/rip
> >
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: 2.6.3i
> > Charset: noconv
> >
> > iQEVAwUBO8ScyjkCAxeYt5gVAQEgDwgAkmM6xPhGv9vaAnijZRxbdYRKpBEZ6Ov6
> > Cc/9oRI3twCicIpaCRvSg3Glwj9kyGEZNcLKN9Mn6nE2rboSviEM7gL1THk8gBbd
> > +wf2bNAFGlJgQufMvQDIJevEYAKQARdH6xki5d6kqncY1NPcRl2PaTozrjTWv/t7
> > TZ+r5IGMJMu33GuLKMIx5/TYf8QQvRHEY1uj0q2zOCqE4o2SA6VF5INvJdh1b4io
> > ywSvbZYxW6z9wqrpKHz2zKOLK+a3Vqu2ChplMWn2+QucdFP4QTKmn1dawkVssj3R
> > wHx0P1w3ESRrH0og1w/nrDTZioYkT6y2N9RxZoKuLzopdumbA3Wyvw==
> > =eD2A
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email