Subject: RE: [Geopriv] Domain identifier in common policy

From: "Thomson, Martin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:34:29 -0600

I tend to agree with Andy - particularly given the recommendations in RFC 3470.  Where parsers MUST support both, adding this additional restriction is likely to complicate matters unnecessarily.

M

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
> Of Randall Gellens
> Sent: Saturday, 14 January 2006 1:01 PM
> To: Geopriv WG; Simple WG
> Cc: Henning Schulzrinne; Allison Mankin; Andrew Newton
> Subject: Re: [Geopriv] Domain identifier in common policy
> 
> I think we need to resolve the issue of saying "MUST use UTF-8" (and
> hence disallowing UTF-16) or not.
> 
> Please reply by Friday January 20 if you feel strongly that we need
> to add the restriction: "Common policy MUST use UTF-8 to store domain
> names in 'id' domain attributes".  If there is no consensus to add
> this restriction, we won't.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message is for the designated recipient only and may
contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.  
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
immediately and delete the original.  Any unauthorized use of
this email is prohibited.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[mf2]

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv