Re: Where we stand and where we are going

Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net> Wed, 26 June 2002 19:51 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-irnss-errors@lists.elistx.com>
Received: from ELIST-DAEMON.eListX.com by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) id <0GYB00A04WIMAC@eListX.com> (original mail from brunner@nic-naa.net); Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:51:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.eListX.com by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) id <0GYB00A01WILAA@eListX.com> for ietf-irnss@elist.lists.elistx.com (ORCPT ietf-irnss@lists.elistx.com); Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:51:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from DIRECTORY-DAEMON.eListX.com by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) id <0GYB00A01WILA9@eListX.com> for ietf-irnss@elist.lists.elistx.com (ORCPT ietf-irnss@lists.elistx.com); Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:51:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from nic-naa.net (216-220-241-233.midmaine.com [216.220.241.233]) by eListX.com (PMDF V6.0-025 #44856) with ESMTP id <0GYB0093NWILO7@eListX.com> for ietf-irnss@lists.elistx.com; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:51:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from nic-naa.net (localhost.nic-naa.net [127.0.0.1]) by nic-naa.net (8.12.4/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5QJpABZ009604; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:51:10 -0400 (EDT envelope-from brunner@nic-naa.net)
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:51:10 -0400
From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>
Subject: Re: Where we stand and where we are going
In-reply-to: "Your message of Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:27:39 EDT." <3D1A15AB.2CD6E4CC@thinkingcat.com>
To: Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com>
Cc: John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com>, Michael Mealling <michael@neonym.net>, ietf-irnss@lists.elistx.com, brunner@nic-naa.net
Message-id: <200206261951.g5QJpABZ009604@nic-naa.net>
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN
List-Owner: <mailto:ietf-irnss-help@lists.elistx.com>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-irnss@lists.elistx.com>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.elistx.com/ob/adm.pl>, <mailto:ietf-irnss-request@lists.elistx.com?body=subscribe>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.elistx.com/ob/adm.pl>, <mailto:ietf-irnss-request@lists.elistx.com?body=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.elistx.com/archives/ietf-irnss/>
List-Help: <http://lists.elistx.com/elists/admin.shtml>, <mailto:ietf-irnss-request@lists.elistx.com?body=help>
List-Id: <ietf-irnss.lists.elistx.com>

In drafting draft-jaye-mumble, we came real close to proposing to put the
p3p-++-esque policy for a cookie on several octets. The policy weenies in
p3p-land vetoed anything that didn't approximate Leslie's schema <-> xslt
comment, so we have compact policies (section 4 of the p3p spec), that are
not xml, but look like it.

A constraint, at least beyond the wireline/wireless demark, was the byte
count. It turns out that evaluation complexity is a harder constraint.

Now in this problem space, we've got the same dinky byte arrays the IDN
mob had, and no worse frequency of putting junk on the wire than the dns
has, so byte count isn't the first constraint.

That said, the weakness I see, with the little wit I possess, in an XML
framework is that XML and its authoring body have "solved" the charset
problem by defaulting to Unicode.

Yes, other charsets may be expressed.

I don't expect anyone to agree with me, but I feel that the problem space
is over-constrained, and poorly-constrained, when the solution space must
incorporate Unicode.

My $.02 of EBCDIC,
Eric