Re: WG Review: Internationalized Domain Names in Applications (idna)

At 18:57 26/02/2008, The IESG wrote:
>A new IETF working group has been proposed in the Applications Area.  The
>IESG has not made any determination as yet.  The following draft charter
>was submitted, and is provided for informational purposes only.  Please
>send your comments to the IESG mailing list (iesg <at> ietf.org) by March 4,
>2008.

Dear Friends,
A few years ago the same scenario developed when introducing the RFC 
3066bis failed Draft, but without an initial consensus check.

I explained several times that the choice for some Gov/Private/Civil 
Society interests was to get it corrected or aborted (then at the 
risk of the whole IETF). The decision was to get it corrected in 
consideration of its probable mandatory usage by IBM/MS customers. I 
accepted to carry the job after the WG-IDNA's poor results where it 
was that I became accustomed to the IETF. It was also due to 
architecturally erroneous (IMHO) RFC 3935.

This was pure mail-combat in what Economic Intelligence calls 
"knowledge war" and the DoD calls "shaping the world". This was a 
nice exchange for no one, but it did preserve interoperability with 
other referential systems, RFC 4646 was not adopted by the IESG 
before the very day it could be accepted, and its 
"internationalization" doctrine was further defeated at ISO TC46. As 
a result, I was the only one to be PR-acted and the IETF was not hurt 
(except by the IESG not respecting its RFC 4646 obligations, what RFC 
4646bis has now to take care of)..

This time, the DNS in the Multilingual Internet is certainly just as