Re: IDNABIS Working Group completes its work

[Yoshiro YONEYA <[e-mail]>]

Dear Vint and all,

I'd like to know in detail why the editors, the chair and the AD couldn't 
satisfied with current mappings document.  If the reason was not cleared, 
mappings document couldn't be go forward.

Even if mappings document is informational, the publication of the document 
as RFC is very important to keep backward compatibility and interoperability 
between current systems.

Regards,

-- 
Yoshiro YONEYA <[e-mail]>

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:59:32 -0400 Vint Cerf <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Ladies and Gentlemen of the IDNABIS Working Group, as you see from this
> notice, the last working group document that was not yet forwarded by the AD
> has been declared "dead" after it proved impossible to find a version that
> could be forwarded to the IESG that satisfied the preferences of the
> editors, the chair of IDNABIS and the Area Director. It is expected that the
> editors of the "mapping" document will offer a version of it as an
> informational, non-WG contribution.
> 
> All other documents from the working group have been forwarded to the RFC
> editor for final processing.
> 
> I believe this concludes the business of the IDNABIS Working Group and, as
> chair, I declare that the Working Group has completed its work and can now
> be retired from the active list.
> 
> I thank the editors, the Area Director, and especially the participants in
> the IDNABIS working group for their time and thoughtful contributions to the
> work over the past two years.
> 
> Vint Cerf
> 
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: The IESG <[e-mail]>
> Date: Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 1:53 PM
> Subject: ID Tracker State Update Notice: draft-ietf-idnabis-mappings
> To: [e-mail],
> [e-mail]
> 
> 
> 'State Changes to Dead from AD is watching by Lisa Dusseault'
> ID Tracker URL:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=18600&rfc_flag=0