Network Working Group Jean-Francois C. Morfin Internet-Draft Intlnet Intended status: Independent submission September 30, 2009 Expires: March 30, 2010 Comments on the IDNA2008 documents set draft-iucg-idna2008-ietf-lc-00.txt Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other than English. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 14, 2010. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Morfin Expires March 30, 2010 [Page 1] Internet-Draft IDNA IETF/LC September 2009 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Abstract The IDNA2008 document set is now under IETF/LC. The memo publishes the position of the non-WG iucg@ietf.org (Internet User Contributing Group) mailing list that its facilitator can neither present nor discuss during that Last Call. Table of Contents 1. Introduction................................................... 3 2. Complementary objectives....................................... 3 3. The contribution of these users................................ 3 4. IDNAPLUS....................................................... 3 5. The Interplus facilitation architecture........................ 4 6. Security considerations........................................ 5 7. IANA considerations............................................ 5 8. References..................................................... 5 Requirements notation The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. Morfin Expires March 30, 2010 [Page 2] Internet-Draft IDNA IETF/LC September 2009 1. Introduction The discussion on IDNA2008 was followed by several linguistic organizations. Among them, French speakers of various origins formed a motivated group and rallied the france@large IDN center of expertise and received much political and qualified support throughout Francophonie. This resulted in a parallel effort to that of the Arabic League IDNA list, of an internal list of Microsoft, and may be other undisclosed ones. 2. Complementary objectives This French speakers group first indentified, along with the WG Chair, that they had two different yet complimentary objectives. While consistency with the rest of the Internet architecture was the first thing of interest for the Chair, @larges were first interested in facilitating a response to the needs of the users. In the longer term, they also were interested in innovation continuity towards the Intersem (the semantic and multilingual Internet). However, @larges concluded that facilitating a response to user needs was the best way to strictly respect and protect the architecture and stability of the Internet. 3. The contribution of these users They, therefore, committed themselves to strictly respect the Charter, dedicatedly help the WG process, and further document a 100% conformant IDNA2008 extension that responds to their evaluation of the users' needs (qualified as ML-DNS, multi-layer DNS). They thereby created and maintained the http://wikidna.org site to that end. The @larges, because they are mere Internet lead users, not full-time engineers, some misunderstandings followed. With everyone's goodwill, the iucg@ietf.org non-WG mailing list has been created and its initiators have documented and discussed its charter, by using the IDNA debate as a test-bed. The general IETF mission [RFC3935] is "to produce high quality, relevant technical and engineering documents that influence the way people design, use, and manage the Internet in such a way as to make the Internet work better". The Internet Users Contributing Group's intent is for such documents span and interoperate within a network external user facilitation area, in such a way as to "make the Internet used better". Accordingly, the IUCG has a lead user vision of the same Internet architecture that should fruitfully complement the IETF engineer vision. 4. IDNAPLUS This is why the IUCG adheres to the IDNA2008 set of documents, but not entirely with their point of view. However, it considers that the result is flexible enough to match the way its participants Morfin Expires March 30, 2010 [Page 3] Internet-Draft IDNA IETF/LC September 2009 understand the WG charter. Therefore, it produced, as committed, an I_D to document its own "IDNAPLUS" proposal. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iucg-punyplus-02. This proposal: * is a transparent open solution that can accommodate additional agents and applications. * only concerns the removable introduction of a single additional code point (UMI, uppercase metadata indicator), indicating that the next code point in an xn--label must be restored in uppercase form. * is made within the "Interplus" facilitation system framework that the IUCG is exploring (plus = plugged layers user system). The Interplus context is succinctly introduced in that quoted Draft. The IDNA working group @large participants felt that their proposal fully belongs to IDNA, could be integrated into IDNA2008, will be transparently used by the Registries that need to take into account complete case sensitivity and access to new naming services, and for an ambient solution to dispose of the pollution of the linguistic namespace. 5. The Interplus facilitation architecture However, they fully understand that the Interplus: * intends to address a diversity and new expectations that were not supported by the internet legacy. * is based on a more extended vision of the existing architecture of the Internet that the document on mapping only partly considers. * some of thecapabilities of this architecture are of little or no use today (classes, presentation, inter-application, pseudo-network application, and ubiquity layers) that should be examined further. * calls for full documentation (that can now be studied and produced) and positive IETF and market feedback through community full-scale testing. Their intention is to continue the study, documentation, and development of the Interplus facilitation architecture, and test it through three projects for its evaluation and possible standardization: * Projet.FRA: for a francophone relational space focusing on the support of semantic addressing via IDNAPLUS and for the Morfin Expires March 30, 2010 [Page 4] Internet-Draft IDNA IETF/LC September 2009 organization of its namespace as the taxonomy of an open ontology. * Multilinc: for an open multi-sociolinguistic relational space focusing on the multilinguistical issues (multilinguistics is the cybernetics of linguistic diversity), relations to norms and standards, and mecalanguages. * PERFIDES/PERFIDA: technical relational space focusing on personal RFID applications, namespace security, privacy protection, and IDv6 (IPv6 User ID) related value-added. 6. Security considerations There is no direct security consideration. 7. IANA considerations There is no IANA consideration. 8. References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC3935] Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF", RFC 3935, October 2004 Author's address Jean-Francois C. Morfin INTLNET 23 rue Saint Honore Versailles 78000 Versailles France Phone: (33.1) 39 50 05 10 Email: jefsey@jefsey.com URI: http://intlnet.org Morfin Expires March 30, 2010 [Page 5]