Subject: resignation business

From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 22:09:11 +0200

It would be very much appreciated if someone could explain this  
"resignation" business that recently spilled over into the IETF  
discussion list.

Where did all of this start?

---

From: SM <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 13:56:39 -0700

>Where did all of this start?

This started in the IDNAbis WG.  The WG Chair sent a message to a 
participant warning him that his posting rights may be removed 
[1].  Another participant was also warned [2].  The WG Chair then 
removed posting privileges for that participant and another one [3].

Regards,
-sm

1. http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/2009-April/004453.html
2. http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/2009-April/004478.html
3. http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/2009-April/004489.html

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 17:11:36 -0400

I assume that the relevant procedures were applied, etc. Is there any  
action that is warranted in other domains, or should this be left to  
brew in your particular teakettle?

On Apr 19, 2009, at 4:56 PM, SM wrote:

> participant warning him that his posting rights may be removed [1].   
> Another participant was also warned [2].  The WG Chair then removed  
> posting privileges for that participant and another one [3].
>
> Regards,
> -sm
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 23:45:56 +0200

> posting privileges for that participant and another one [3].

So much I got from what showed up here. But usually there is some kind  
of issue that a few people feel strongly about that leads to this type  
of thing.

I gather that this has something to do with French capitals. Would  
that be whether a letter with an accent retains the accent when  
capitalized? I guess if Asia has the Han unification mess, we  
Europeans also need something...

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 15:35:00 -0700

At 11:45 PM +0200 4/19/09, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
>I gather that this has something to do with French capitals.

Only to small extent; it is much more about personalities.

This will probably come up during IETF Last Call; maybe postpone the fun until then, or if you're really interested, join the IDNAbis WG.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

---

From: James Seng <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 08:04:22 +0800

Actually its was over the mapping of the character Arabic TATWEEL, which
they objected. They refused to cease discussion on ML-DNS when it is pointed
out to them it is out of scope.

Their behavior, their language and method of argument leads many of us in
IDNAbis as well as participants in LTRU that they are a sock puppet of JFC.

I wish I can say take a look at http://iucg.org/ but if you spend enough
time on it, you will understand what i mean, but on the other hand, i would
be just wasting your time.

-James Seng

On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 6:35 AM, Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]> wrote:

> This will probably come up during IETF Last Call; maybe postpone the fun
> until then, or if you're really interested, join the IDNAbis WG.
>
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --VPN Consortium

---

From: "Michel Py" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 20:16:21 -0700

> James Seng wrote:
> Their behavior, their language and method of argument leads
> many of us in IDNAbis as well as participants in LTRU that
> they are a sock puppet of JFC.

There is no room for interpretation in this matter. They are. Although I
do not represent the French IETF community, their behavior has been
frowned upon by many.

Michel.

---

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 17:17:31 +0200

In your previous mail you wrote:

   capitalized?

=> this was and is the rule but because of typewriters the rule was
suspended during the 20th century. Now typewriters are in museums
and current century is 21th. BTW accents can be necessary to avoid
some ambiguities (cf 2nd reference) so the rule (in this case :-) is
justified.

Regards

[email-masked]

PS: no comment about the main subject, there are procedures (including
appeal...).
PPS: ref: http://www.academie-francaise.fr/langue/questions.html#accentuation
and (paper only, no accent to stay in ASCII) le "Lexique des regles
typographiques en usage a l'imprimerie nationale" (incredibly useful,
unfortunately too light to strike with and as far as I know without
an equivalent in IETF English, even the RFC Editor recommends some books
I got).

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 11:25:15 -0400

> some ambiguities (cf 2nd reference) so the rule (in this case :-) is

Please, if people are going to open that debate again, could you (1)
only do it if you've read all the relevant material in the idnabis
archives and (2) do it on the WG mailing list (idnabis), since that's
where the relevant discussions are going on?

I will not rehash the arguements about this here, but I urge people
who want to weigh in on this to think about the matching rules for "E"
and "e" in the DNS, and then think about what might happen if we also
need to accommodate E->é _and_ É->é.  Thank you.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]
Shinkuro, Inc.

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 08:51:50 +0200

On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 05:17:31PM +0200,
 Francis Dupont <[email-masked]> wrote 
 a message of 28 lines which said:

> this was and is the rule but because of typewriters the rule was

That's true but it is completely unrelated to the Morfin troll and his
various avatars. He uses French composed letters as he uses the Arabic
Tatweel or any other thing that goes through his mind but he knows
nothing about it and does not care.

As Andrew said, if we discuss subtle points in writing French or
Arabic, goto IDNAbis WG. If we discuss the "resignation" campaign of
He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, the plenary list is not a bad place. Just
remember there is no relationship between Morfin's claims and any sort
of reality (even a virtual one).

---

From: Marie-France Berny <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 17:46:14 +0200

2009/4/19 Fred Baker <[email-masked]>

> action that is warranted in other domains, or should this be left to brew in
> your particular teakettle?

Dear Mr. Baker,

If you mean that usual ad-hominems applied against posters without a warning
of the Chair, and that their posting rights were terminated not suspended,
etc. I suppose these are the procedures of the new IETF, described by ISOC
as a corporation consortium subject to Platinum member influence.

Anyway, I only reacted to a nasty mail who did not even understand who/what
it was standing for.

IRT. the technical issues involved:

(1)    I belong to the france@large IDNA group, the same as other members of
the WG-IDNABIS belong to the ASIWG or to Unicode. The same as the ASIWG we
do not support the declared WG overwhelming consensus over the TATWEEL case.
Not because we are experts in Arabic, but because we think that such a
decision belongs to Arabic experts.

(2)    I can report that the total consensus (same rule as ASIWG) to solve
this issue is to follow:

-          the advise given by Paul Hoffmann: wait for the IDNA2008 IETF/LC
if it happens sometimes

-           the recommendation given by Andrew Sullivan to understand a key
issue

-          the remark of Michel PY : write French before changing its
spelling

-          the technical positions recently taken by Pete Resnick and John
Klensin

-          the WG Charter which says: " The WG will stop work and recommend
that a new charter be generated if it concludes that any of the following
are necessary to meet its goals: ...  (iii) A change to the basic approach
taken in the design team documents (Namely: independence from Unicode
version and elimination of character mapping in the protocol).

We want independence and no character mapping in the protocol, what would be
immediately opposed by usage leading to an Internet balkanization. To the
contrary, we committed to get IDNA2008 as the core/default of the usage
evolution we work on.

For those wanting to understand better: there are two fundamental Internet
architecture and economy issues at stake through the way IDNA is or is not
implemented. They are the introduction of the missing presentation layer and
its financial impact on the domain name market. Up to now we respected the
principle of the IETF as an individuals’ organization, we protected the
users against the some dangerous standardization bias, and tried to explain
because we did not want to take the risk of an non concerted move.

We have observed that the IETF is now “a small and large corporation” issue
(cf. ISOC). That money plays openly its role as warned by IAB’s RFC 3869.
That it is clearly intended to harm our interests and those of many, for
erroneous or bad reasons we do not want to discuss, as we are only
interested in facts and the adequate operations of our own systems. That the
decision which, in our opinion, will balkanize the Internet has already been
taken and fully exposed. This means that our job is not anymore to prevent
but to fight it and to document a stable, open, and innovative alternative
anyone may chose to oppose, follow, copy, or enhance.

Marie-France Berny
Chercheur

>> participant warning him that his posting rights may be removed [1].  Another
>> participant was also warned [2].  The WG Chair then removed posting
>> privileges for that participant and another one [3].
>>
>> Regards,
>> -sm
>>