RE: [Ltru] Frank's comments (was: Re: proto-draft-10)

"Kent Karlsson" <kent.karlsson14@comhem.se> Tue, 04 December 2007 10:19 UTC

Return-path: <ltru-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IzUs6-0004Vz-5s; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:19:22 -0500
Received: from ltru by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IzUs5-0004Uj-26 for ltru-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:19:21 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IzUs4-0004UP-Oa for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:19:20 -0500
Received: from ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.213]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IzUs3-0003Kx-9A for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:19:20 -0500
Received: from c83-248-80-46.bredband.comhem.se ([83.248.80.46]:1036 helo=wgbgkka02x) by ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from <kent.karlsson14@comhem.se>) id 1IzUrX-0005oE-8L for ltru@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 11:18:47 +0100
From: "Kent Karlsson" <kent.karlsson14@comhem.se>
To: "'LTRU Working Group'" <ltru@ietf.org>
References: <E1IzNhV-0004B6-6Y@megatron.ietf.org> <002201c8363a$7e17ef40$6601a8c0@DGBP7M81>
Subject: RE: [Ltru] Frank's comments (was: Re: proto-draft-10)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 11:18:46 +0100
Message-ID: <014101c8365f$0f25fd00$4751f853@streamserve.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To: <002201c8363a$7e17ef40$6601a8c0@DGBP7M81>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
Thread-Index: Acg2OoGTV4Le+5pDQ+Cr5p5rgPo8LgAI/WsA
X-Originating-IP: 83.248.80.46
X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1IzUrX-0005oE-8L.
X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net 1IzUrX-0005oE-8L d52f9fd829f27ddfeb2289a4930fd013
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
X-Scan-Signature: 1ac7cc0a4cd376402b85bc1961a86ac2
X-BeenThere: ltru@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Language Tag Registry Update working group discussion list <ltru.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ltru>
List-Post: <mailto:ltru@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru>, <mailto:ltru-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ltru-bounces@ietf.org

> Chairs: *do* we have consensus for adding the exceptionally reserved 
> 3166 codes?  I'm not even asking any more for my position to 
> be heard; I just want to know what the decision is.

Just to voice my opinion on this:

I don't much mind adding *ALL* of the "exceptionally reserved" codes,
but then it should be *ALL* of them (in particular including "UK",
as deprecated with a preferred value, which currently is strangely
excluded).

	/kent k



_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru