At 12:38 AM 6/23/2002 +0900, Soobok Lee wrote: >Do you suggest that the new narrower specification should be about
"new" is not a word I would use, right now. I am talking about cutting away the generalities from the current work and leaving the portion that applies to usage for the immediate need. > 1) transitional directory solution that may become the precursor to > the real IDN with "NEW CLASS" ? or > 2) the real IDN limited to hostnames and its supporting RRs > (NS,A,MX,CNAME) ? The idea of defining something that is a transition, without already having the the end-point of the transition also defined and in the process of being deployed is simply not practical. When "transition" takes 5 years and more, it is counterproductive to think of transition as temporary. The work done here is to define the IDN and an encoding scheme for IDN. Perhaps there will be more encoding schemes and perhaps there will not. The only prediction about future IETF work and future Internet development that has proved accurate is that predictions prove to be inaccurate. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com> tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850
