Subject: RE: improving WG operation

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 16:50:05 -0700

> Just remember that Internet users have designed P2P, VoIP, 
> NATs, etc. for 
> some and that others have more processing and communication 
> powers than the 
> whole AT&T 20 years ago) and you never know who will need 
> what (even if 
> 99.99% will never read an RFC, they will all read RFC quotes 
> and they must 
> be clear and consistent with what their consultant, their ISP, their 
> operator will tell them). What I mean is there is no Internet 
> "gnosis", 
> there should only be an Internet "gospel".

Exactly, do I have to send an engineer to every IETF WG meeting just to
make sure that they don't decide to delete some feature of some protocol
that I am depending on?

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

---

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 02:29:20 +0200

>make sure that they don't decide to delete some feature of some protocol

They do not not only delete. I suggest you just come to the WG-ltru where 
they have decided to document RFC 2277 charsets into RFC 3066 langtags. So 
you can enjoy charset conflicts, something you never though about, I 
presume. You cannot stop progress.
jfc

---

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 19:43:52 -0700

Hi -

> From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
> To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
> Cc: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 5:29 PM
> Subject: RE: improving WG operation
...
> presume. You cannot stop progress.
...

I guess Jefsey is upset because the WG rejected his proposal
to expand our scope to include charsets.  The ltru WG is most
emphatically *not* confusing charsets with language tags.

Randy, ltru co-chair

---

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 06:08:18 +0200

>emphatically *not* confusing charsets with language tags.

I am not upset :-). To the countrary I find extremely interesting that some 
people were able to rename charsets "scripts" in order to insert charsets 
into languages descriptions while claiming they dont (cf. above). Obviously 
they are unhappy when I expose the trick. Anyway the result is great fun: 
people will be prevented from accessing a page they know to read, if they 
do not know the language.

This cacologic however might be a good way to solve the IDN homograph issue 
and the phishing problem.

If we revert from those famous "scripts" to what they are, i.e. unicode 
partitions, hence stable and well documented charsets 
(http://www.unicode.org/Public/4.1.0/ucd/Scripts.txt) , using them browsers 
can expose the homographs not related to the page charset in IDNs, and kill 
the risks of phishing.

This only calls for the browsers to extract the charset, I mean the script 
name from the langtag, call this file, read the list of codes points in the 
charset/associated to the script, and display the URL accordingly, 
indicating the characters which are no part of the script/charset. This 
relieves the ccTLD/TLD Manager from responsibilities he cannot fulfil at 
3+level.

There are howver still (minor) points to address:
- there are some minor disparities between the "script" name in the 
langtag, and the script name in the script.txt file should be reduced over 
time. I suppose that if this is a major issue, there will be help.
- the script.txt file is currently supported on the Unicode site. Even in 
caching it (92 K) it will be called everytime people will start their 
browser. This may therefore represent several billions of access a day.
- the WG-ltru only realy wants to address XML issues, related to old XML 
libraries. Some coordination with other WGs or interests could be fruitful. 
They plan the language tags registry to extend to scripts and to register 
them. I suppose other WGs could benefit from this (all those involved in a 
way or another with internationalisation and languages).

jfc

---

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 23:18:39 -0700

Hi -

Let it suffice for me to say that I believe the gentleman is mistaken.
I do not intend to waste additional bandwidth on this thread.
Those interested in ltru and its work will find our charter at
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html and our archives at
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/index.html

Randy, ltru co-chair

----- Original Message ----- 
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Cc: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 9:08 PM
> Subject: a way toward homograph resolution ? (was "improving WG operation")
>

---

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 16:06:35 +0200

On 08:18 11/05/2005, Randy Presuhn said on the [email-masked] list
>http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ltru/index.html

Bravo, Randy! This is the good spirit.

I fully agree we need there a few people more who know and care about the 
network architecture and who have read the charter. We will soon discuss 
the charter, so now is a good time to join. Every point which can be 
addressed/clarified within the WG will not have to be addressed during the 
Last Call, or will permit to speed up the Last Call.

FYI I, I consider hosting a one/two day(s) concertation meeting on 
Multilingual Internet and MGN (multilingual generalized/global network) in 
Versailles. After the UNESCO Bamako meeting on Multilingual Cyberspace, and 
the Paris EGENI meeting on July 2nd.

I have here access to a prestigious XVIIIth century lounge (Chamber of 
Commerce). I plan informally inviting people from MINC, ISO, UNESCO, ITU, 
Eurolinc, AFRAC, WSIS, GAC, etc. Every IETF interested member would be 
welcome. This could be at the occasion of the IETF meeting (days before or 
the day after). The room can accept 30 persons on a table and 100 
otherwise. A 200 cosy seats room at the Town Hall (on the Castle Avenue) 
could also be used. This would be for some brain storming before Tunis.

Topics could include:

- a Network Technical Document (could also be an IETF draft?) on a "MGN 
languages and cultures identification framework"
- IPv6 international divide. Sovereignty over national naming and numbering 
spaces. National intelligence protection.
- technical support of the regalian services.
- IDN vs. ML.ML names and multilingual grassroots international efforts and 
deployment
- international classes and groups
- multilingual keyboards and panel to support universal applications 
propositions.
- CRC (context reference centers) and decentralised universal root and 
Identification Grids.
- participation to ISO committees, and international structures
- consideration of IAB RFC 3869, and R&D strategies of the different 
governments
- MLTF project and directory
- report on MGN applications and project and on SNHN support.

I am ready to include some form of F2F preparation of the WG-ltru current 
Draft being hold there (I informed of my invitation of the WG for a F2F 
meeting). May be over a diner (?). To try to settle at least a few points 
in a more general architectural and consensual perspective, with the 
legitimacy of the leading concerned parties being involved (I note that I 
am the only non-English speaker at the WG-ltru, what is preoccupying when 
dealing with a change in the Internet support of languages, and a 
responsibility I would love to share with other non-English speakers. I am 
very concerned by the IETF deliverables being deprecated by reality before 
being published).

I suggest that those who are interested contact me off-line not to overload 
the IETF general mailing list.
jfc