Re: [newprep] wg/newprep project: clarification asked

Mark Lentczner <markl@lindenlab.com> Wed, 02 June 2010 15:20 UTC

Return-Path: <markl@lindenlab.com>
X-Original-To: newprep@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: newprep@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BFAC3A693F for <newprep@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Jun 2010 08:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3Q0v75ZdX6gv for <newprep@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Jun 2010 08:20:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pz0-f195.google.com (mail-pz0-f195.google.com [209.85.222.195]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FE633A68C4 for <newprep@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Jun 2010 08:20:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pzk33 with SMTP id 33so294693pzk.17 for <newprep@ietf.org>; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 08:20:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.141.108.19 with SMTP id k19mr6548236rvm.110.1275491691038; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 08:14:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sansome-guest-129.lindenlab.com ([204.16.156.74]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l29sm6308033rvb.4.2010.06.02.08.14.48 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 02 Jun 2010 08:14:49 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Mark Lentczner <markl@lindenlab.com>
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20100602015956.05ef91a8@jefsey.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 07:10:46 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D557134D-37E8-4264-8557-B1BF502BB7FC@lindenlab.com>
References: <E9728BD9-05DE-485B-B2DB-7F3D440B49E6@lindenlab.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20100519230359.05dfd258@jefsey.com> <F6EBD01F-868D-48AD-A867-D0F021DC011A@lindenlab.com> <7.0.1.0.2.20100602015956.05ef91a8@jefsey.com>
To: jefsey <jefsey@jefsey.com>, newprep@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078)
Cc: gerard lang <gerard.lang@insee.fr>
Subject: Re: [newprep] wg/newprep project: clarification asked
X-BeenThere: newprep@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Stringprep after IDNA2008 <newprep.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/newprep>, <mailto:newprep-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/newprep>
List-Post: <mailto:newprep@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:newprep-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/newprep>, <mailto:newprep-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 15:20:41 -0000

On Jun 1, 2010, at 5:09 PM, jefsey wrote:
> This is not the documented aim.

Perhaps I misunderstood, but it seemed that after the phrase "My question is therefore:", you listed a statement of a goal, and asked specifically if it was a goal of "newprep possible participants". I thought it was your aim to ask if I shared that as an "immediate or ultimate" goal, and I answered "no".

> The documented aim was illustrated with the ISO 3166-4 needed stringprep: the Internet exemple (Bulgarian case) is to permit an IDNxTLD registration on a first come first serve basis.

Do you mean that the aim you were asking about is the complex of political, organizational, procedural, and technical points enmeshed in your e-mail about Bulgarian TLD registration, and perhaps your prior e-mails? 

If so, again, my answer is no, those are not my goals for newprep.

	- Mark

==
== Prior exchange for reference:
==

On May 19, 2010, at 2:35 PM, JFC Morfin wrote:
> > My question is therefore:
> >
> > -          "a need is identified by our Internet user contributing party. This need is for a stable, unique, comprehensive manner to orthotypographically format prepared strings whatever the script and language. Such a format must prevent phishing and support a single registry indexing and sorting order of every possible orthotypographic string, throughout the Internet protocols, related applications, and interoperated technologies.
> > -          Is this or is this not also an immediate or ultimate goal for the AD, WG Chair, and WG/newprep possible participants?"

At 22:56 01/06/2010, Mark Lentczner wrote:
> This is not my goal for a newprep WG: It is too broad in aims, and unrealistic that a single method would serve all protocols and applications.