Subject: RE: [idn] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-arrouye-idn-ie5-resolution-00.txt

From: Yves Arrouye <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 13:39:41 -0700

> (and unless you have knowledge that Microsoft will fail to implement
> IDN correctly once it is standardized, could you also remove 
> "and Above" from the title?)

Well, this is how it works in IE 5.5 too. And in IE 6 beta. And in later
versions of IE, I'd assume, until this working group produces a
recommendation. Then, I hope, everybody will want to do something else. I
for one would *really* like to have a standard to implement.

Nor do I believe that we are abusing either the IETF publication process or
protocol standards, as you suggested, by the way. We replied to a request
for information, and believe that both the disadvantages (e.g. doesn't work
as part of an URI) and the advantages of this approach have been presented.

YA

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 17:48:18 -0400

> recommendation. 

right.  but if the document is published as an RFC then the title is
frozen, even if the behavior of IE changes.    so the title could
be misleading at some point.

> as part of an URI) and the advantages of this approach have been presented.

I do appreciate your documeting the interface, I just don't think that
some of the language is appropriate.

as for documenting the disadvantages, you haven't even scratched the surface.  
for instance, you're giving support to at least one illegal monopoly that 
continues to use its power to victimize consumers.

---

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 17:17:14 -0500

When you say...."illegal monopoly"....Are you referring to ICANN ?

Jim Fleming
http://www.DOT-Arizona.com
http://www.DOT.Arizona

---

From: "Soobok Lee" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 07:36:30 +0900

AFAIK,
Many versions of Netscape Navigators [456].x   'just send'
 8-bit (not neccesarilly UTF8 in many cases) domain names to DNS servers,
even if they contain  non-LDH special characters, for example '&' .

Is this a feature or a harmful bug ?

To Netscape Navigators, this IE5-IDN-like  approach is not applicable ?
right?
Can any Netscape person answer for this question ?