Paul, There was an implicit question in my note: is anyone using these "test" registrations for operational purposes?
I was responding only to the question whether the registrations should be immediately terminated or allowed to phase out. The latter was not intended to place burdens on any clients - the presumption I was making is that if it works now, would it not keep working for that existing subset of clients that use it? If there is a technical mutual-exclusion problem (can't work with both), I would agree that the non-IDNA registrations would have to be terminated. Vint At 02:27 PM 3/24/2003 -0800, Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote: >At 7:03 PM -0300 3/24/03, vinton g. cerf wrote: >>the only reason for suggesting the time table was uncertainty whether any of these >>registrations were in regular use as sites on the net. as opposed to purely test >>sites. > >Why should that matter? If anyone was using these in "regular use", they were doing >so with no standard and, for at least the past year, no available Internet Draft. Why >do you feel that clients that conform to IDNA should also conform to every possible >Internet Draft that preceded it, particularly when those drafts were explicitly >rejected by the WG years ago? > >This is not normally how the IETF makes standards... > >--Paul Hoffman, Director >--Internet Mail Consortium Vint Cerf SVP Architecture & Technology WorldCom 22001 Loudoun County Parkway, F2-4115 Ashburn, VA 20147 703 886 1690 (v806 1690) 703 886 0047 fax
