Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA2008 WG (newprep)
Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Wed, 19 May 2010 13:44 UTC
Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
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 2E83E3A6CA0; Wed, 19 May 2010 06:44:59 -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 x2xWV1NJ+J4e; Wed, 19 May 2010 06:44:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (stpeter.im [207.210.219.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 627413A6CD4; Wed, 19 May 2010 06:41:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from leavealone.cisco.com (128-107-239-233.cisco.com [128.107.239.233]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6E91E40D06; Wed, 19 May 2010 07:40:59 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <4BF3EA68.6050103@stpeter.im>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 07:40:56 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
References: <20100511173002.3EB993A6D0F@core3.amsl.com> <tslzkzxjfmh.fsf@mit.edu> <4BF2D57F.8090807@viagenie.ca> <tsltyq5hxq5.fsf@mit.edu> <4BF2DD30.8030702@viagenie.ca>
In-Reply-To: <4BF2DD30.8030702@viagenie.ca>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1
OpenPGP: url=http://www.saint-andre.com/me/stpeter.asc
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"; boundary="------------ms030806090208060006090508"
Cc: ietf-krb-wg@anl.gov, ietf@ietf.org, newprep@ietf.org, aland@freeradius.org, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, iesg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA2008 WG (newprep)
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, 19 May 2010 13:44:59 -0000
On 5/18/10 12:32 PM, Marc Blanchet wrote: > Le 10-05-18 14:27, Sam Hartman a écrit : >>>>>>> "Marc" == Marc Blanchet<marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca> writes: >> >> Marc> we had a discussion about the same subject: i.e. should we >> Marc> restrict the scope to a specific set of documents to >> Marc> review/update/... or do we keep some provision for other >> Marc> documents coming in the stream that require "help" of the >> Marc> newprep. I was arguing for the latter. To me, what you are >> Marc> talking about is the latter. Obviously, some people wanted >> the >> Marc> charter to be restrictive in order to not go all over the >> Marc> place, and I agree in principle... However, this work is >> kinda >> Marc> horizontal: touches many areas, so having a more large >> view of >> Marc> the problem space and documents that depends on this newprep >> Marc> work would be very valuable to the working group >> Marc> work. Therefore, I'm more for opening a bit the charter for >> Marc> the cases like the ones you are talking about. >> >> I'm happy with a restrictive charter so long as the work areas >> identified today (including mine) are included. > > my guess is that we most likely will discover other issues/newprep > potential "customers" as we go, that it might be useful to work on, > since they have a lot of similarities with the others official in the > charter. Agreed. > therefore, more "opened" than closed charter. We're trying to balance two things here: (1) we want to get as much input as possible from current and potential customers of stringprep or newprep/stringprepbis/whatever, but (2) we want to scope the WG tightly enough that it doesn't have a mandate to work on "anything related to internationalized strings". >> I'm happy drawing a >> line in the sand and saying "here's what we'll touch first," so long as >> people who bring up items now get included. I'd probably be happier >> with a reasonably open charter. >> >> I'm not at all happy if the items I bring up or other similar items >> brought up now are excluded. In an email exchange with Marc and Alexey Melnikov last week, I proposed adding the following paragraph to the charter: Although the group may provide advice regarding other technologies, it will prioritize work on the above-listed stringprep profiles and will take on additional tasks as official milestones only after rechartering. We might want to broaden that a bit further to explicitly mention seeking feedback from customers other than the existing stringprep profiles: Although the group will seek input from and may provide advice to "customers" working on other technologies, it will prioritize work on the above-listed stringprep profiles and will take on additional tasks as official milestones only after rechartering. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
- [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA2008 WG… IESG Secretary
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… JFC Morfin
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Sam Hartman
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Marc Blanchet
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Sam Hartman
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Marc Blanchet
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Marc Blanchet
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Mark Lentczner
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Alan DeKok
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Sam Hartman
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Sam Hartman
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Jiankang YAO
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Sam Hartman
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA200… Sam Hartman