- From: <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 20:26:05 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Eric Brunner-Williams <wampum@maine.rr.com>
- Cc: ned.freed@mrochek.com, Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>, Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>, discuss@apps.ietf.org
> Going back to Mr. Harrison's original question, could you offer him a > sensible answer that made a contrary assertion to the one I made, and > Keith took exception to, and explain that no header processing issues > are involved, only "domain" and "address" issues? In other words, you want me to argue Keith's points for him. Thanks but no thanks. For my part I never said that "no header processing issues are involved". What I did say is that until it is clear what direction IDN is going we cannot work usefully on things like "header processing issues". For all we know at this point we'll end up with some directory solution layred on top of existing services that argues strongly for something akin to X.400's ORAddressAndDirectoryName construct. (And no, I'm not saying that I think such an outcome is likely or that it appeals to me. All I'm saying is that anything is possible at this point.) > Since I have been participating in the IDN list most of this year, your > closing para(s) were for someone else's benefit, right? You did read > Keith's comment that the IDN requirements draft is irrelevant, so as > you both agree with Keith completely _and_ recommend people read > the requirements draft, your point is ... what? Eric, this is flummery and you know it. Shame on you. I responded to one message of Keith's by saying I agreed with everything he said in it. Then Keith said in a separate, subsequent message that he believes the IDN requirements draft is irrelevant. Agreeing with what Keith said in one message doesn't mean that I agree with everything he says in subsequent messages. The very notion that this would be so is absurd. > This is heading towards interesting territory -- don't use apps, don't > use 822, don't use ... and don't complain about IDN. > Not what I expected. I have no idea what your expectations are, and after what you said in this message, I frankly don't care. Even if I were interested in discussing header processing issues at this point (I'm not), it is now clear that you have no intention in engaging in a sensible or reasonable discussion. So as far as I'm concerned this discussion is now terminated. Ned
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2001 23:50:27 UTC