On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 5:03 PM John C Klensin <john-i...@jck.com> wrote:
> > If that (IMO rathole) is not appealing, I think reality --the > same reality you appeal to in not wanting to cite IDNA2008 as > definitive-- dictates abandoning, at least for the present, the > idea of a global namespace in which all actors follow the same > rules. Other than trying to standardize wishful thinking (which > I don't believe the AD and IETF will let you get away with, but > I could be wrong), I think that leaves two choices. The first > is to do more or less what I suggested, which is to describe the > current situation, messy as it clearly is, to whatever degree of > accuracy and precision seems appropriate, and move on. The > other is to conclude that UTA cannot move further forward with > this document unless there is, in practice, a global namespace > for which everyone is following the same rules and drop the > document itself. > Hi, I suspect you're wrong here. I think the Wayne Gretzky misquote* is "skate to where the puck will be". We can't go backward from UTS46. So, we'll be in the acceptance phase, I guess. Now, of course people are going to go make domains that don't pass IDNA2008, but that's kind of the point, even if kind of jerky. thanks, Rob * he didn't say this, his coach did
_______________________________________________ Uta mailing list Uta@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
