Re: [Idna-update] [Ext] FWD: Expiration impending: <draft-klensin-idna-rfc5891bis-01.txt>

Patrik,

That was before my time on the IAB, sorry.

But as it happens, I’m looking at an update to the IAB statement, so have been pondering this very question. Do you think that https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-klensin-idna-5892upd-unicode70-05.txt <https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-klensin-idna-5892upd-unicode70-05.txt> covers the options reasonably well? 

Thanks,
Suzanne
("member of, not speaking for, the IAB")

> On Mar 5, 2018, at 3:22 PM, Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> wrote:
> 
> I did send the question, and gave choices, to IAB on July 9 2014.
> 
> Message-Id: <93768164-79F7-443D-8A7F-0411661B6EF9@frobbit.se>
> 
> Since then the question has been stalled waiting for consensus on how to move forward.
> 
>   Patrik
> 
> On 5 Mar 2018, at 21:02, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> 
>> Does the IAB know that, and have an opinion?
>> 
>> A
>> 
>> -- 
>> Please excuse my clumbsy thums
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ----------
>> On March 5, 2018 14:38:48 Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 5 Mar 2018, at 20:15, Kim Davies wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Quoting John C Klensin on Monday March 05, 2018:
>>>> 
>>>>> Given that there has been no discussion of this draft in the
>>>>> last few months, that there seems to be no interest in it in the
>>>>> IESG (although we have not pressed hard on it specifically), and
>>>>> that the possibly-complementary
>>>>> draft-freytag-troublesome-characters draft has already expired,
>>>>> I'm just going to let this expire unless someone gives me a good
>>>>> reason why not in the next few minutes (if a revision is not
>>>>> posted today, the draft will expire because, without special
>>>>> permission, nothing can be posted between tomorrow and the start
>>>>> of IETF).
>>>>> 
>>>>> I hope no one interprets this as complete lack of interest in
>>>>> pursuing IDN issues, or even clarification of the IDNA
>>>>> standards, in the IETF.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> With the expiry of these efforts, I am concerned more generally that the standing IAB guidance in
>>>> https://www.iab.org/documents/correspondence-reports-documents/2015-2/iab-statement-on-identifiers-and-unicode-7-0-0/
>>>> has kept the pre-computed IDNA tables published at IANA downgraded to Unicode 6.3.0 for a number of years. It seems appropriate to revisit publishing tables against contemporary Unicode editions if there is no active work on publishing clarifying RFCs in this regard.
>>> 
>>> Speaking as the by IAB appointed expert that do approve new tables, I simply can not unless there are some guidance and agreement in the IETF on how to move forward.
>>> 
>>> The few people involved that spend time on these issues makes it hard to draw conclusions on "the right path forward". This given the situation we are in, as described by John.
>>> 
>>>   Patrik
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IDNA-UPDATE mailing list
>>> IDNA-UPDATE@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>>> 
> _______________________________________________
> IDNA-UPDATE mailing list
> IDNA-UPDATE@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idna-update