財團法人台灣網路資訊中心因公出國人員報告書
51st
IETF 會議記錄與報告
中央研究院資訊所 王大為、吳俊興
London, England, Aug 5-10, 2001
這次出國是到英國倫敦,參加第51屆IETF會議,自八月五日起為期六天,同時出席MINC的相關會議。目前IETF每年舉辦三次會議,本次是本年度的第二次會議,上次是三月在美國的明尼蘇達州密里雅波斯舉行,下次十二月將回到美國在猶他州的鹽湖城舉行。如同往常,本次會議依然吸引許多世界各地的專家學者與會,但因地緣關係,本次會議有更多的歐洲國家人士出席,相較上次,來自美國的出席人數比率也較為減少,而來自亞洲的人數仍以日本人最多,韓國其次,來自台灣的除了我們TWNIC的兩名與會代表外,另有一名來自工研院參與MobileIP的代表。另外,來自大陸的有CNNIC三人。
這次與會的重點在參與 IDN工作會議的討論與表決,並與IDN及MINC相關人士交換意見。由於IDN的標準制定工作已經落後預期進度許多,因此IDN工作小組的主要成員在會前即以儘速達成各項共識為目標,來運作此次的小組會議,重點包括:ACE、Matching及Protocol部份。雖然此次會議花最多的時間在討論Protocol部份,但並沒有讓三個Drafts有報告的機會,其中包括TWNIC曾教授所提的 UNAME draft。因此我們除了在會議進行當中表達我們的立場及意見外,同時也在會議前後私底下與相關人士進行溝通,並將會場的最新狀況,隨時透過網路向國內回報。
n
會前準備及會後後續討論會議
在前往倫敦參加本次IETF的IDN工作會議前後,曾就本次會議的各項重點議題及IDN相關問題,在國內舉行了數次研討會議來廣徵各方的意見,包括行前於七月五日及八月一日舉行正式的中文網域名稱技術小組第二十四次及第二十五次會議,會後在八月十九日舉行IETF會議會後討論會,並在八月二十四日舉行的「國際化域名及基礎設施路由」討論會議中,與孔祥重院士及IETF 前主席暨IAB成員Fred Backer和Scott Brander交換相關意見。同時我們也在會議期間及前後,與相關人員針對本次會議進行了約兩百封的信件來往討論。
n
第一天(八月五日):報到、會議組織介紹、歡迎會
本次大會是由英國電信BT (British Telecommunications)主辦,在倫敦市中心的Hilton London Metropole 飯店舉行。除了提供24小時開放的Terminal Room之外,BT同時在整間飯店佈滿了802.11b的無線網路,在所有公共空間隨時都可以上網,相當方便。另外,除了提供傳統的IPv4網路外,現場的網路也支援 IPv6。Terminal Room內有10部Unix、40部Windows的公用電腦,以及多部Printer Servers和臨時的Mail Servers。現場除了可以無線上網之外,也提供了近兩百個100Mbps Ethernet 連接頭。除了頻寬充足、設施齊全便利之外,網路系統的穩定性也很高。
前天晚上搭機抵達倫敦稍做休息後,第一天中午就到大會現場報到。在報到時,只見現場人山人海,提供有線網路連接、可容納兩三百人的Terminal Room也早已客滿,因此會場邊到處可見很多人席地而坐操作notebook,透過會場提供的無線網路上網。報到完之後,依照大會提供的網路暨電腦設定使用指南,我也順利地連上網路收送Emails。
原訂下午1:00舉行的Security Tutorial臨時因故取消,所以繼續待在會場使用電腦上網。然而由於恰逢Red Code網路病毒肆虐,世界各地及台灣的網路深受其害,從會場很難直接連回台灣,經輾轉借道美國後才勉強可以連回台灣收送Emails,此問題大概持續了兩天。
下午3:30出席IETF的Newcomer及Standards Process的Orientations,聽IETF的組織運作及標準制定過程之介紹,一直進行到近五點結束。隨後參加歡迎會,現場擠滿了幾百人。本來約CNNIC的人在歡迎會上碰面,但未能遇到。飯後再回到Terminal Room上網,同時準備會議資料。
n
第二天(八月六日):MINC會議
早上研商策略,並分析IDN其它Drafts的優劣,同時分析IDN成員的相關言論立場。中午搭地鐵轉兩次車到Thistle Marble Arch Hotel參加MINC的會議,共約十多人出席。彼此交換名片後,就IDN及未來可能方向交換意見。會後再回到IETF會場,透過Email回報狀況,並繼續與曾教授商討Unicode/Legacy encoding、繁簡互換、UNAME等相關問題。
n
第三天(八月七日):IDN議程出爐、準備投影片
在IDN工作小組會議前兩天,主席才將議程公布。兩小時的開會時間內將花75分鐘在Protocol討論,但是不像其它部份,Protocol部份並沒讓各drafts (IDNA、UDNS、UNAME)報告,僅由Dave Crocker花十分鐘做Protocol comparison。因此我們收集Dave Crocker的資料,並由TWNIC向IDN提出報告的請求,同時仍持續與國內進行UNAME及繁簡問題的討論,並針對此次IDN會議著手彙整修改投影片。
n
第四天(八月八日):開幕大會
早上繼續與國內進行討論,並完成UNAME投影片初稿。下午與CNNIC碰面,交換情報,並得知明天的IDN會議將以舉手的方式形成共識決:
(1). ACE部份,目前可能在 AMC跟MACE間選擇其一做為Standard,其中初步的綜合評估結果:用AMC對TW/KR/JP不錯,對CN很好;MACE對TW/KR/JP很好,但對CN不好。
(2). Matching部份,Nameprep可能會過,以目前Unicode為準變成standard,但不含jpchar、tsconv,他們建議 jpchar、tsconv自己去要求 Unicode將 CJK放進去,他們就考慮接受,或者我們自已協調 ,變成 informational的RFC,做為 Nameprep 的 prepare,但IDN小組不見得會接受。或者就是完全不處理,自行用Zone file處理。
(3). Protocol部份,IDNA可能會被推成共識,目前所有的protocols都沒有安排時間做presentation,只安排Dave Crocker做十分鐘的protocols比較。
向國內回報後商討會議策略、並評估IDNA通過後的影響,同時修改投影片。晚上19:30參加開幕大會,聽取BT總裁的演講,以及IRTF、IAB、RFC Editor、IANA、IESG和各area directors等各相關人士的報告,會議進行到近晚上十一點才結束。
n
第五天(八月九日):IDN會議
這次來參加IETF的重頭戲將在今天登場。早上先再與CNNIC討論ACE、繁簡互換及UNAME的相關意見,並研擬下午IDN會議進行時如何互相支援。隨後與Patrick會談,各自澄清IDNA、繁簡、UNAME,但彼此並沒有交集。繁簡及日韓文問題應不會被放進Nameprep中,也許IDNA draft可以提到應該要有 standardized pre-prepare,但要看IDN WG的共識,同時IDNA也許更改為不限只能在Applications中處理IDN,但同樣要以IDN WG的共識為依歸。隨後中午13:00起即開進行IDN WG的工作會議,大致的結果如下:
一.ACE選擇AMC-Z
二.Nameprep部份希望能繼續把幾個draft 整合
三.關於Protocol 部分 最後是做了表決成為所謂的共識,現場投票的結果是IDNA除了我們幾個反對以外,反對的人不多,UDNA與UNAME支持的人比反對的人少,所以最後的結論是 ”IDNA gets strong support, and UDNA and UANME are opposed strongly.”
詳細的會議記綠如附件。在IDN工作會議結束之後,主席James跑來解釋為何無法讓UNAME報告,以及IDN WG的立場和難處。Local、Regional、Legacy的問題,IDN WG的人沒興趣,要動DNS Protocol、違反Requirements或Charter message的提案都難被接受。另外建議也許tsconv、jpchar、UNAME往Informational 或Experimental / Best-practice 型式的RFC發展,即不在正式的Standard track RFC內,而UNAME如果不走DNS就較容易被接受。與James談了兩個多鐘頭之後,我們則繼續和UDNA的作者交換一下意見。UDNA走UTF-8,想看看有無可能跟UNAME整合。討論完之後,回Terminal Room用Email跟台灣回報狀況。整天會議下來,整體的評估是IDNA/Nameprep/ACE已把板塊劃清了。隨後晚上一群人共進晚餐,交換與會心得。
n
第六天(八月十日):會議落幕
早上回會場Terminal Room以Email跟國內交換與會心得,同時遇到CNNIC的人並稍微討論一下。中午十二點正,會議正式落幕,同時Terminal Room也將關閉,順利結束了為期六天的IETF-51會議。
IDN部份:
l 對IDN、UNAME的了解
l 網路國際化與區域化的衝突
l 與CNNIC、MINC、IDN等的交流
l 未來IDN WG的影響評估
IETF部份:
l 對IAB/IESG/IETF/WG等的運作機制及標準制定的體會
l 參與IETF的利弊
l 角色定位:考察觀摩與長期參與、Follow-up 與 Leading
l 參與策略:單打獨鬥與集團結盟
IDN部份:
l UNAME與繁簡(漢字)的後續發展
l 了解Unicode/ISO10646、CNS11643及MINC等其它相關組織的狀況
l 由CDNC、JET擬定標準的可能
l 針對未來IETF成立Keyword及UTF-8 IDN (8-bit clean DNS) WG預做準備
l 提早準備IETF52會議─12月9-14日在美國猶他州鹽湖城 (10月8日資料上線)
IETF部份:
l 了解IETF其它相關WG在國際化方面的動向,如:
–Major: dnsext, dnsop, whoisfix, cnrp
–Minor: LDAP(ldapbis, ldaup, ldapext) , ipng, routing
l 及其對TWNIC及台灣的影響
l 與IETF建立長期友好關係,含Area Directors
l 針對網路Localized暨中文化問題,評估建立類似IETF標準制定的機制及RFC之類的文件
其它部份:
l 與國內其它中文處理相關單位的連繫
l 聯合國內CLE、軟體自由協會等volunteers的人力
l 其它Internationalization(I18N)及Localization問題
l ISC/BIND (Internet Software Consortium)、IMC(Internet Mail Consortium)及 W3C等的參與
1.
攜回資料,會議資料將在會議結束後十週出版。
(線上電子版本在 http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/01aug/ )
2. 參考資料
[1] IETF homepage, http://www.ietf.org/
[2] IETF-51 Meeting homepage, http://www.btexact.com/ietf_51/index.htm
[3] IETF Internationalized Domain Name (idn) Charter, http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/idn-charter.html
[4] Internationalized Domain Names IETF Working Group, http://www.i-d-n.net/
3.
附錄資料
A. Agenda of the 51st IETF Meeting
B. Working Group and BOF Agendas
C. Agenda of IDN WG meeting at IETF51
D. Minutes of IDN WG meeting at IETF51
E. MINC London Meetings
F. IDN mailing list發表者排行 (至2001/08/03為止)
G. UNAME Draft 原擬發表的投影片
附錄A.
Agenda of the 51st IETF Meeting
Agenda of the
51st IETF Meeting
August 05-10,
2001
http://www.ietf.org/meetings/agenda_51.html
(Text Format of the Agenda Is Available)
SUNDAY, August 5,
2001
1000-1700 IEPG
Meeting - Hilton Rooms 1-6
1200-1900 Registration - Monarch Suite/Viscount 2
1300-1500 Security Tutorial - King's Suite/Balmoral 2 changed to Palace
Suite
1530-1600 Newcomer's Orientation - King's Suite/Balmoral 2 changed to
Palace Suite
1600-1630 IETF Standards Process Orientation - King's Suite/Balmoral 2
1700-1900 Welcome Reception - King's Suite/Sandringham 1
1930-2200 MADDOGS Meeting - Hilton Rooms 1-6
MONDAY, August 6,
2001
0800-1930 IETF Registration - Monarch Suite/Viscount 2
0800-0900 Continental Breakfast - Viscount, Mezzanine Balcony, West Wing Lobby
Bar
0900-1130 Morning Sessions
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
APP |
apparea |
Applications Open Area Meeting |
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
INT |
magma |
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
IRTF |
idrm |
Internet Digital Right Management |
Belgrave/Clarence |
OPS |
disman |
|
Windsor Suite |
RTG |
manet |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
SEC |
ipsp |
|
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
SUB-IP |
mpls |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
TSV |
sip |
1130-1300 Break
1300-1500 Afternoon Sessions I
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
APP |
simple |
SIP for Instant
Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions WG |
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
OPS |
mboned |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
OPS |
policy |
|
Belgrave/Clarence |
RTG |
udlr |
|
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
SEC |
ipsec |
IP Security Protocol WG |
Windsor Suite |
TSV |
megaco |
|
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
TSV |
seamoby |
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
USV |
uswg |
1500-1530 Break
(Refreshments) - Viscount, Mezzanine Balcony, West Wing Lobby Bar
1530-1730 Afternoon Sessions II
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
APP |
cdi |
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
APP |
webdav |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
INT & |
dnsext & |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
OPS |
sming |
|
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
RTG |
pim |
Protocol Independent Multicast WG * |
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
SEC |
pkix |
|
Belgrave/Clarence |
TSV |
nfsv4 |
|
Windsor Suite |
TSV |
rserpool |
1730-1930 Break
1930-2200 Evening Sessions
Belgrave/Clarence |
APP |
fax |
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
APP |
imapext |
|
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
OPS |
rap |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
RTG |
mobileip |
|
Windsor Suite |
SEC |
inch |
Extended Incident
Handling BOF - CANCELED |
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
SUB-IP |
ccamp |
|
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
TSV |
ips |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
TSV |
rmt |
* Designates Multicast
Sessions
TUESDAY, August 7,
2001
0800-1700 IETF Registration - Monarch Suite/Viscount 2
0800-0900 Continental Breakfast Viscount, Mezzanine Balcony, West Wing Lobby
Bar
0900-1130 Morning Sessions
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
APP |
opes |
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
IRTF |
smug |
Secure Multicast Group |
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
OPS |
eos |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
OPS |
ngtrans |
|
Windsor Suite |
SEC |
secsh |
|
Belgrave/Clarence |
SUB-IP |
gsmp |
|
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
TSV |
ips |
|
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
TSV |
sip |
1130-1300 Break
1300-1400 Afternoon Sessions I
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
APP |
prim |
|
|
|
|
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
APP |
webi |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
OPS |
rap |
|
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
OPS |
multi6 |
|
Windsor Suite |
RTG |
forces |
|
Belgrave/Clarence |
SEC |
sasl |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
TSV |
ippm |
|
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
TSV |
spirits |
1415-1515 Afternoon
Sessions II
Windsor Suite |
APP |
ldup |
|
Belgrave/Clarence |
INT |
ipoib |
|
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
INT |
itrace |
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
OPS |
entmib |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
RTG |
msdp |
Multicast Source Discovery Protocol WG * |
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
SEC |
aft |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
TSV |
pilc |
|
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
TSV |
rmt |
1515-1545 Break
(Refreshments) - Viscount, Mezzanine Balcony, West Wing Lobby Bar
1545-1645 Afternoon Sessions III
Windsor Suite |
APP |
ldup |
|
Belgrave/Clarence |
INT |
ipoib |
|
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
OPS |
dnsop |
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
OPS & |
hubmib & |
|
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
RTG |
rtgarea |
Routing Area Meeting * - CANCELED |
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
SEC |
ipsec |
IP Security Protocol WG * |
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
TSV |
pwe3 |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
TSV |
sigtran |
1700-1800 Afternoon
Sessions IV
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
INT |
ipobt |
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
OPS |
bridge |
|
Belgrave/Clarence |
OPS |
entmib |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
RTG |
mobileip |
|
Windsor Suite |
SEC |
ipsra |
|
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
SUB-IP |
iporpr |
|
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
TSV |
iptel |
|
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
TSV |
pwe3 |
* Designates
Multicast Sessions
WEDNESDAY, August
8, 2001
0800-1700 IETF Registration - Monarch Suite/Viscount 2
0800-0900 Continental Breakfast - Viscount, Mezzanine Balcony, West Wing Lobby
Bar
0900-1130 Morning Sessionsa
Cadogan/Berkeley |
APP |
calsch |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
INT |
urp |
|
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
OPS |
opsarea |
|
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
RTG |
isis |
|
Windsor Suite |
SEC |
smime |
|
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
SUB-IP |
ppvpn |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
TSV |
avt |
1130-1300 Break
1300-1500 Afternoon Sessions I
Cadogan/Berkeley |
APP |
deltav |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
APP |
impp |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
INT |
ipngwg |
|
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
OPS |
aaa |
|
Belgrave/Clarence |
OPS |
rmonmib |
|
Windsor Suite |
RTG |
idr |
|
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
SEC |
tls |
|
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
TSV |
tsvwg |
1500-1530 Break
(Refreshments) - Viscount, Mezzanine Balcony, West Wing Lobby Bar
1530-1730 Afternoon Sessions II
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
APP |
provreg |
|
|
|
|
|
Windsor Suite |
INT |
dhc |
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
OPS |
adslmib |
|
Belgrave/Clarence |
SEC |
krb-wg |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
SEC |
msec |
|
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
SUB-IP |
ipo |
|
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
TSV |
seamoby |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
TSV |
sipping |
1730-1930 Break
1930-2200 Open Plenary - King's Suite
2230 Late Night
Session -
Hilton Rooms 1-6
PGP Key Signing
* Designates
Multicast Sessions
THURSDAY, August 9,
2001
0800-1700 IETF Registration - Monarch Suite/Viscount 2
0800-0900 Continental Breakfast - Viscount, Mezzanine Balcony, West Wing Lobby
Bar
0900-1130 Morning Sessions
Belgrave/Clarence |
APP |
ldapbis |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
INT |
dnsext |
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
INT |
ipcdn |
|
Windsor Suite |
OPS |
ipfx |
|
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
SEC |
sacred |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
Sub-IP |
tewg |
|
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
TSV |
avt |
|
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
TSV |
diffserv |
1130-1300 Break
1300-1500 Afternoon Sessions I
Belgrave/Clarence |
APP |
ldapext |
LDAP Extension WG |
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
INT |
idn |
Internationalized Domain Name WG * |
Windsor Suite |
INT |
l2tpext |
|
|
|
|
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
OPS |
hubmib |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
OPS |
ptomaine |
Prefix Taxonomy
Ongoing Measurement & Inter Network Experiment BOF |
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
SEC |
kink |
|
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
TSV & |
hip & |
Host Identity
Payload BOF (at 1300-1400) & |
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
TSV |
mmusic |
1500-1530 Break
(Refreshments) - Viscount, Mezzanine Balcony, West Wing Lobby Bar
1530-1730 Afternoon Sessions II
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
APP |
whoisfix |
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
INT |
atommib |
|
Windsor Suite |
INT |
zeroconf |
|
Belgrave/Clarence |
OPS |
bmwg |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
OPS |
policy |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
SEC |
saag |
Open Security Area Directorate Meeting * |
Hilton Rooms 1-6 |
TSV |
rohc |
|
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
TSV |
sipping |
* Designates
Multicast Sessions
FRIDAY, August 10,
2001
0800-1000 IETF Registration - Monarch Suite/Viscount 2
0800-0900 Continental Breakfast - Viscount, Mezzanine Balcony, West Wing Lobby
Bar
0900-1130 Morning Sessions
Belgrave/Clarence |
APP |
trade |
|
Cadogan/Berkeley |
APP |
vpim |
|
King's Suite/Balmoral 2 |
INT |
ipngwg |
|
Palace Suite/Blenheim |
IRTF |
aaaarch |
Authentication Authorisation Accounting ARCHitecture |
Windsor Suite |
OPS |
rmonmib |
|
King's Suite/Sandringham 1 |
TSV |
midcom |
|
Palace Suite/Buckingham |
TSV |
rohc |
* Designates
Multicast Sessions
AREA DIRECTORS
APP |
Applications |
Patrik Faltstrom/Cisco Systems and Ned
Freed/Innosoft International |
INT |
Internet |
Thomas Narten/IBM Corp. and Erik Nordmark/Sun
Microsystems |
OPS |
Operations & Management |
Randy Bush/Verio, Inc. and Bert Wijnen/Lucent
Technologies |
RTG |
Routing |
Rob Coltun/Redback and Abha Ahuja/Merit Network
Inc. |
|
|
|
SEC |
Security |
Jeff Schiller/MIT and Marcus Leech/Nortel
Networks |
SUB-IP |
Sub-IP Area |
Scott Bradner/Harvard Univ. and Bert Wijnen/Lucent
Technologies |
TSV |
Transport |
Scott Bradner/Harvard Univ. and Allison
Mankin/USC/ISI |
USV |
User Services |
April Marine/Nominum, Inc. |
附錄B.
Working Group and BOF Agendas
Working Group and
BOF Agendas
·
AAA
- Authentication, Authorization and Accounting WG
·
AFT
- Authenticated Firewall Traversal WG
·
AVT
- Audio/Video Transport WG
·
BMWG
- Benchmarking Methodology WG
·
CALSCH
- Calendaring and Scheduling WG
·
CCAMP
- Common Control and Measurement Plane WG
·
CDI
- Content Distribution Internetworking BOF
·
DELTAV
- Web Versioning and Configuration Management WG
·
DHC
- Dynamic Host Configuration WG
·
DIFFSERV
- Differentiated Services WG
·
DISMAN
- Distributed Management WG
·
DNSEXT&NGTRANS
- Joint DNS Extensions WG & Next Generation Transition WG Meeting
·
DNSOP
- Domain Name Server Operations WG
·
FORCES
- Forwarding and Control Element Separation WG
·
GEOPRIV
- Geographic Location/Privacy WG
·
GSMP
- General Switch Management Protocol WG
·
HIP
- Host Identity Payload BOF
·
HUBMIB
- Ethernet Interfaces and Hub MIB WG
·
HUBMIB
& ATOMMIB - Ethernet Interfaces and Hub MIB WG & AToM MIB WG
·
IDR
- Inter-Domain Routing WG
·
INCH
- Extended Incident Handling BOF
·
IMAPEXT
- Internet Message Access Protocol Extension WG
·
IMPP
- Instant Messaging and Presence Protocol WG
·
INCH
- Extended Incident Handling BOF
·
IPCDN
- IP over Cable Data Network WG
·
IPOBT
- IP over Bluetooth BOF
·
IPOIB
- IP over InfiniBand WG
·
IPORPR
- IP Over Resilient Packet Rings WG
·
IPSP
- IP Security Policy WG
·
IPSRA
- IP Security Remote Access WG
·
ISIS
- IS-IS for IP Internets WG
·
KINK
- Kerberized Internet Negotiation of Keys WG
·
L2TPEXT
- Layer Two Tunneling Protocol Extensions WG
·
LDAPBIS
- LDAP (v3) Revision WG
·
LDUP
- LDAP Duplication/Replication/Update Protocols WG
·
MAGMA
- Multicast & Anycast Group Membership BOF
·
MANET
- Mobile Ad-hoc Networks WG
·
MBONED
- MBONE Deployment WG
·
MSEC
- Multicast Security WG
·
MEGACO
- Media Gateway Control WG
·
MIDCOM
- Middlebox Communication WG
·
MMUSIC
- Multiparty Multimedia Session Control WG
·
MOBILEIP
- IP Routing for Wireless/Mobile Hosts WG
·
MPLS
- Multiprotocol Label Switching WG
·
MULTI6
- Site Multihoming in IPv6 WG
·
NFSV4
- Network File System Version 4 WG
·
NGTRANS
- Next Generation Transition WG
·
OPES
- Open Pluggable Edge Services BOF
·
OPSAREA
- Operations & Management Open Area AG
·
PILC
- Performance Implications of Link Characteristics WG
·
PKIX
- Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509) WG
·
POLICY
- Policy Framework WG
·
PPVPN
- Provider Provisioned Virtual Private Networks WG
·
PRIM
- Presence and Instant Messaging Protocol WG
·
PROVREG
- Provisioning Registry Protocol WG
·
PTOMAINE
- Prefix Taxonomy Ongoing Measurement & Inter Network Experiment BOF
·
PWE3
- Pseudo Wire Emulation Edge to Edge WG
·
RAP
- Resource Allocation Protocol WG
·
RMONMIB
- Remote Network Monitoring WG
·
RMT
- Reliable Multicast Transport WG
·
ROHC
- Robust Header Compression WG
·
RSERPOOL
- Reliable Server Pooling WG
·
SACRED
- Securely Available Credentials WG
·
SEAMOBY
- Context and Micro-mobility Routing WG
·
SIGTRAN
- Signaling Transport WG
·
SIMPLE
- SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions WG
·
SIP
- Session Initiation Protocol WG
·
SIPPING
- Session Initiation Protocol Project Investigation BOF
·
SMIME
- S/MIME Mail Security WG
·
SMING
- Next Generation Structure of Management Information WG
·
SPIRITS
- Service in the PS TN/IN Requesting InTernet Service WG
·
TRADE
- Internet Open Trading Protocol WG
·
TEWG
- Internet Traffic Engineering WG
·
TLS
- Transport Layer Security WG
·
TSVWG
- Transport Area Working Group
·
UDLR
- UniDirectional Link Routing WG
·
URP
- User Registration Protocol BOF
·
VPIM
- Voice Profile for Internet Mail WG
·
WEBDAV
- WWW Distributed Authoring and Versioning WG
·
WEBI
- Web Intermediaries WG
·
WHOISFIX
- Whois Enhancement BOF
·
ZEROCONF
- Zero Configuration Networking WG
Please send questions, comments and/or suggestions to ietf-web@ietf.org.
附錄C.
Agenda of IDN WG meeting at IETF51
寄件者:
"Marc Blanchet" <Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca>
收件者:
<idn@ops.ietf.org>
主旨: [idn]
agenda v1.0 ietf-london
日期: 2001年8月7日 上午 09:06
Hi,
here is a first cut of the proposed
agenda. The idea here is to leave
room
for concensus building.
==================================================
Agenda:
agenda bashing, 1 min., Marc Blanchet
wg update, 5 min., Marc Blanchet
ACE encoding
ACE comparison, 5 min., Yoshiro
Yoneya
Reordering, 5 min., Soobok Lee
ACE concensus building (Choosing
an ACE if we need one), 5 min.
Matching
Nameprep update, 5 min., Paul
Hoffman
TSconv, 5 min., Xiang Deng
Hangulchar, 5 min., Soobok Lee
Matching concensus building, 10
min.
Protocol
Protocol comparison, 10 min.,
Dave Crocker
Protocol concensus building, 55
min.
Conclusion and next steps, 10 min.
================================================
Marc
& James.
PS1.
I was on vacation for the past few weeks, so that is why both the
agenda
and the pool were not updated.
PS2.
I will update the web site shortly and will announce in a separate
email
the document pool (a few are not yet there because of PS1 above).
附錄D. Minutes of IDN WG
meeting at IETF51
IETF
IDN Working group session
9
August 2001
London,
England
Agenda
Bashing:
Agreement
on the floor to cut
Reordering, nameprep update, Uname
proposal, Hangulchar, tsconv
from
planned agenda.
================================================================
WG
UPDATE, Marc Blanchet
Coordination
with other groups/efforts:
-
IETF apps area
- "requirements" for
encoding: ACE or UTF8
- directory efforts:
directory@apps.ietf.org
-
Unicode/ISO
- Any modifications to
Unicode/ISO tables should be done by those
parties, not IETF
-
IETF dnsext WG
- Any modification to DNS
protocol should be discussed in dnsext
-
ICANN/IANA
- Policies
-
Pool W, pool of documents that identify core of interest by WG
-
Currently:
- requirements
co-chairs believe
there is a wg rough concensus and intend to forward
it to IESG for
Informational.
- idna
- nameprep
- dude
- aceid
- jpchar
- ace-eval-jp
- mace
- uname
- tsconv
- udns
- amc-ace-z
- hangeulchar
- lsb-ace
-
Today's focus is on standards track proposals
================================================================
ACE
EVALUATION WITH IDNs ALREADY REGISTERED, Yoshiro Yoneya
-
Done by CNNIC, KRNIC, TWNIC and JPNIC with data they have for
registered domain names, focusing on
ACEs in Pool W.
-
Most important evaluation criterion to study is to maximize number
of characters, raw speed is less
important because nameprep is the
slow stage.
-
Long IDNs (more than 15 Han characters) are already registered.
-
Evaluated ACEs: DUDE, AMC-ACEZ, MACE and RACE
-
Focus on DUDE and AMC-ACE-Z with MACE&RACE as reference
Graphs
of efficiency of domain names from each of KRNIC and TWNIC,
where
AMC-ACE-Z shows best compressions
Charts
showing that the four NICs consider AMC-ACE-Z to be either good
or
very good, while others were "bad" or "very bad" for at
least one NIC.
MACE
co-authors (including the presenter, Yoneya-san) support
AMC-ACE-Z.
Recommendation
from the study is: AMC-ACE-Z
================
WG
Questions for sense of the group:
Question:
If there is a need for an ACE, choose one:
-
DUDE
few hands
-
AMC-ACE-Z
most hands
-
MACE
(removed at request of authors)
-
don't care but want an ACE chosen fair bunch of hands
Erik
Nordmark: question is, if you use an ACE, this is the one. Not
saying
you need to use an ACE anywhere.
?:
What is re-ordering?
James
Seng: pre-processing to make more frequently used chars more
compressed.
Paul
Hoffman: Not binding vote. Should be comfirmed on mailing list.
Concensus:
AMC-ACE-Z (with many don't care so long one is choosen)
Should
we do reordering?
-
Yes
some hands
-
No
some
hands
No
clear result of poll.
Erik
Nordmark: A lot fewer people participated in the former poll but
not
the latter. Why?
Bill
Manning: We read the draft but didn't understand it, and need to
read
it again.
Paul
Hoffman: Don't understand the re-ordering draft. Does not
broaden
to other scripts.
Larry
Masinter: Re-ordering adds complexity.
Kilnam
Chon: Re-ordering is critical for CJK but add complexity.
Paul
Hoffman: This draft adds complexity, so perhaps people are waiting
to
decide how to judge whether the added complexity is worth it.
Eric
Chen: This is just intended to help CJK. Most of the interest
is
in CJK. Why not?
James
Seng: What I'm hearing is that the authors should do a
cost/benefit
analysis, but it is clear the draft is not ready to move
forward.
Erik
Nordmark: Can someone do a pro/con analysis draft, or someone do pro and
someone
con, to help drive the discussion on the mailing list?
Paul
Hoffman: Let's make Adam [Costello] do it. [laughter]
Kilnam
Chon: This straw poll process isn't really valid because not
enough
representation from people for whom this is really important.
There's
always a trade-off.
James
Seng: Could someone who voted against the lsb draft just explain
why
you are against it?
Paul:
I'd rather someone else did, but I will ... the reordering draft
is
somewhat of a hack to optimize for certain scripts, but it is at
the
cost of other scripts, isn't really generalized, and there has
been
no analysis of how beneficial it is for DUDE and AMC-ACE-Z.
Dongman
Lee: The author was not trying to propose this as a
generalized
mechanism. It is not surprising
that since CJK is driving
internationalization,
that proposals would be specific to that.
Ted
Hardie: As Paul pointed out, this has different effects on
different
scripts, but now that we are focused on one ACE we can ask
more
specifically for the authors to focus on just how it affects
AMC-ACE-Z.
Concensus:
discuss the reordering on mailing list and request authors
of ACE and reordering to come to a
proposal with analysis.
================================================================
MATCHING
(NAMEPREP)
-
Need for a standardized pre-processing step regardless of what IDN
protocol we choose?
Yes lot of hands
No one hand
(Discussion
clarified the question from the original.)
Other
comments:
Patrik
Faltstrom: Doesn't preclude other pre-processing before it,
which
some people have worried it would.
But even so, IETF really
needs
to have one standard way of processing Unicode.
James
Seng: When you say one standard way, do you mean one with flexibility
for
locale, or essentially fixed?
Patrik
Falstrom: Essentially fixed.
Dave
Crocker: I thank Patrik for his comments that helped clarify
things
for me. I used to be resistant to
it, but am coming to accept
it. It is quite a bit like the
case-insensitive/sensitive thing we're
so
used to in ASCII. There are two
processes here: case-mapping and
determining
the legal character set. Keep them
cleanly separate.
?
Russell:
Wenhui
Zhang: Should have a standard that includes where local issues
can
be defined, which can include their standarized pre-processing.
?:
Goal of working group is noble, but are trying to kill all the
birds
with one stone, and so we need a really large stone. So many
legacy
systems are optimized for their local languages, and will have
a
lot of pain to switch to what is being planned. They don't have
much
of a voice here, those who are going to suffer most.
?:
Look into what happened in the LDAP group, how they ended up with a
bunch
of language-specific things. It is
difficult, but it can be
done,
and since it has already been solved, build on it.
Erik
Nordmark: Can we get back on the topic of this question? We seem to be
wandering
into the general requirements area.
POLL:
Many to 1 in favour of standard pre-processing step.
Post
poll:
John
Klensin: I can agree that a standard pre-processing step is
needed,
but I can't agree if that necessarily means having a single
binary
result even in ambiguous situations.
Very concerned about that.
This
working group might be resulting in something that is totally
irrelevant.
Eric
Brunner-Williams: The ambiguity need not exist in "uniprep" (the
first
of the stages observed by Dave Crocker), the problem arises in
the
other part.
Paul:
I think we should now work toward an architecture that includes
pre-nameprep,
nameprep and post-nameprep. The
middle one can be
generally
standardized while the other stages need not be.
Erik
Nordmark: Addressing John's concern of irrelevance, I can see how
this
work would eventually be superseded by something better, but that
doesn't
mean we have to stop doing this very useful work now.
Dave
Crocker: Dealing with "language" is out of scope for this group, this
working
group should just be about expanding the set of strings that
are
usable as domain names. In that
context canonicalization makes a
lot
of sense, but not when we start talking about natual language.
Ted
Hardie: I have to take exception to Paul describing a system that
is
not standarized end-to-end; it can't include processing that is not
standardized. Also agree with Dave that we can't work
with natural
language,
we don't have the expertise.
?:
Rigorously avoid natural languages.
Eric
Chen: We need to consider natual language!
Dave
Crocker: The scope is very narrow and does not include languages.
Harald:
"Yes."
Paul
Hoffman: Please defer all questions of language, there will be a draft
soon
that addresses where it should be addressed.
Next
step will be for the authors to clarify the relation between
the
various proposals for processing into a cohesive architecture,
namely
nameprep, tsconv, jpchar, hangeulchar.
================================================================
PROTOCOL
PROPOSALS, Dave Crocker
Dave's
Disclaimers:
-
System oriented person
-
Not a Unicode expert, or even naif
-
Entirely biased -- wanted to be objective, but failed
IDN
Task:
-
Enhance range of domain names that are useful
-
Not human "name"
-
Not "language"
-
Has no sets
-
Requires: fairness, efficiency, reliability, transition, ...
The
Usual Suspects:
Encoding
Approach
1.
ACE only
IDNA
2.
UTF-8 only
IDNA-mod, uDNS
3.
ACE then UTF-8 IDNA-mod, uDNS
4.
ACE & UTF-8 both
uDNS, uNAME
5.
Anything goes uNAME
Encoding
efficiency:
-
ACE is an encoding scheme
-
UTF-8 is an encoding scheme
-
Both map many bits to a variable length string
-
All variable length strings are unfair to some poeple
-
Fair vs unfair unfairness:
- longer mapping mean shorter
names
- shorter names restricted to
information dense character sets
Encoding
comparison:
1.
ACE is three minuses bad.
2.
UTF-8 is two minuses bad.
Charts
showing that there are a lot of modules in both systems, and we
have
to worry about all the modules in both systems.
ACE
has an extraordinarily minimal amount of change necessary to make
an
IDN useful, just two applications.
This is about as good a
transition
scheme as you can possibly get.
UTF-8
is an extreme in the opposite direction, it requires that
everything
work end-to-end.
1.
ACE only four pluses good
2.
UTF-8 only five minuses bad
Transition
Interactions:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Client->
Server->
ACE
UTF-8
Server Client
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.
old client old dn new dn transparent UTF-8 and ACE
new server
maybe break client
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.
new client, new dn old dn transparent break server?
old server
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specification
comparison:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency Transition
Risk/Operational
Expense
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDNA
(ACE)
bad(data)
automatic
none
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
how to detect
uDNS
(UTF-8) poor(data) when to use ACE?
high
(poorly defined
and not realistic)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
unstated
uName
(both) bad (round trip) (and based on
CNRP, very, very
with no meaningful high
deployment)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Olafur:
Hard for me to say this to you Dave, given our history, but
good
job.
Harald:
Think you underestimate the cost of ACE a bit, in that leakage
will
confuse users. But UTF-8 leakage
will also confuse users, but
likely
even a bit more! But the ranking is still good.
Paul:
uName doesn't actually have CNRP in it; it was put in the draft
and
then explicitly shot down in the draft.
It uses a new RR, but the
end
result is pretty much the same as far as your conclusions go.
Erik
Nordmark: Can we vote on it without a UTF-8 draft in the pool?
Would
need a draft very fast.
Poll:
-
idna?
Yes Most
No Some
-
udns?
Yes Few
No Most
-
uname?
Yes Few
No Most
Interpretation
by Harald and Marc was that: IDNA was the only strongly
supported
proposal in the room and the other two had
strong
opposition. Interpretation was agreed by the floor.
Nameprep
discussion back (some time remaining)
Paul
Hoffman: Good (from a marketing sense) user interfaces will do a lot of
mucking
with input. Really should have it
defined how and where they
can
do that. If you change machine, different local translation
tables
can yield different names.
James
Seng: It can be very hard to determine what local conversion
option
to turn on. Not sure if this wg has capability to deal
with
codepoint matching. We need to reference code points outside
the
IETF, at Unicode Consortium.
Paul
Hoffman: Unicode has put mapping tables out of scope.
Harald
Alvestrand: This working group is internationalized access to domain
names,
not localized. This group is
trying to specialize what a
client
must do no matter where it is in the world. I would accept a
statement
that the relationship between the pre-processing drafts. It
has
to be made mandatory though or it should not be part of the output
of
this group.
Wenhui
Zheng: IDNA draft should be explicit where the local
interface/mapping
should be done.
Eric
Chen: We have built a house and opened some gates but not others.
Some
languages can come in and others can not. IDNA should open its
gate
to allow other languages to do their thing.
================================================================
NEXT
STEPS
-
AMC-ACE-Z as chosen ACE.
-
Reordering to be discussed on mailing list.
-
relation between nameprep/tsconv/hanguelchar/jpchar/stringprep
to be consolidated into one
architecture.
-
Go forward with IDNA.
附錄E. MINC London Meetings
寄件者:
"YJ Park (MINC)" <yjpark@minc.org>
收件者:
<announce@minc.org>
主旨:
[minc-announce] Final Participant List and Coordination for London MINC
Meetings
日期: 2001年8月4日 下午 09:31
Dear
Members,
MINC
secretariat is to remind that Monday and Tuesday
meetings
have been designed as informal meetings among
MINC
members and Invitees by MINC therefore, there will be
no
specific agenda presented.
However,
the draft agenda of August 9 meeting after IETF
has
been restrictly circulated among MINC members and
some
of Invitees.
Thank
you for your cooperation in advance and we look
forward
to meeting you in London soon.
MINC
Secretariat
---------------------------------
MINC
London Meetings
---------------------------------
MINC
Informal Meeting before IETF IDN WG
Date
:August 6, Monday 11:45 - 12:45
Place:
Marble Arch Boardroom(Lunch)
Buffet lunch 15.00 Pounds per person
MINC-Keyword
Working Group
Date:
August 7, Tuesday 18:30 - 20:30
Place:
Lincoln room(Dinner)
3 Course Dinner 28.50 Pounds per person
MINC
Meeting after IETF IDN WG
Date:
August 9, Thursday 18:00 - 20:00
Place:
Salisbury Room
-------------------------------------
**All
the Rooms are at Thistle Marble Arch Hotel, London
Bryanston
Street, Marble Arch, London W1H
7EH.
Please,
refer to map attached for the direction.
**Please,
note the time for Monday meeting is 11:45 - 12:45
**Payments
for Informal MINC Lunch and Dinner meeting are
expected to be paid by
participants.
[Appendix]
----------------------------------------------------------
List
of London MINC Meeting Participants
----------------------------------------------------------
VeriSign
Jeongjun
Seo
Michael
Mealing
Leslie
Daigle
Nominum
David
Lawrence(* maybe)
RealNames Nicolas
Popp
Yves Arrouye
Lisal Poulson
JPNIC
and JDNA Yoshiro Yoneya
Toru Takahashi
1 or 2 more likely
Netpia.com
Chang Hun Lee
Jin Hyoun Bae
i-DNS James Seng
(*Maybe)
Millennium
Inc
Asaad. Y. Alnajjar
IAK
Deokjai
Choi
Yangwoo Ko
Moonpyo
Seo
Sunyoung Han
KAIST
Kilnam
Chon
IETF
Patrik
Faltstrom(*Tuesday only)
John Klensin(*for specific
meetings
only)
James Seng(*maybe)
Harald Alverstrand (no comment)
Marc Blanchet (Yes)
TWNIC(CDNgroup) Dr.
Da Wei Wong
Dr. Chun Hsing Wu
CNNIC(CDNgroup) Zhang Wenhui
Deng Xiang
KRNIC
Jae-chul Sir
Chanki Park
Ahn-gu Kang
Seung-jae Lee
Dongman Lee
Neulevel
Alan Sullivan
MINC
Tan Tinwee(*Thursday only)
YJ Park
Total
Around 35
people
附錄F. IDN mailing list發表者排行 (至2001/08/03為止)
Rank Posts Name Email
1 171 "keith moore" <moore@cs.utk.edu>
2 114 "adam m. costello" <amc@cs.berkeley.edu>
3 92 "james
seng/personal" <james@seng.cc>
4 92 "d. j. bernstein" <djb@cr.yp.to>
5 87 "patrik
=?iso-8859-1?q?f=e4ltstr=f6m?= " <paf@cisco.com>
6 79 "eric brunner-williams
in portland maine" <brunner@nic-naa.net>
7 77 "eric a. hall" <ehall@ehsco.com>
8 73 "soobok lee" <lsb@postel.co.kr>
9 68 "martin duerst" <duerst@w3.org>
10 64 "john c klensin" <klensin@jck.com>
11 55 "paul hoffman /
imc" <phoffman@imc.org>
12 55 "dave crocker" <dhc@dcrocker.net>
13 54 "dan oscarsson" <dan.oscarsson@trab.se>
14 47 "edmon" <edmon@neteka.com>
15 44 "marc blanchet" <marc.blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca>
16 36 "brian w.
spolarich" <briansp@walid.com>
17 33 "mark davis" <mark@macchiato.com>
18 31 "liana.ydisg" <liana.ydisg@juno.com>
19 25 "david hopwood" <david.hopwood@zetnet.co.uk>
20 24 "j. william semich" <bill@mail.nic.nu>
21 23 "yves arrouye" <yves@realnames.com>
22 20 "martin j. duerst" <duerst@w3.org>
23 15 "bruce thomson" <bthomson@fm-net.ne.jp>
24 14 "ben" <ben@cc-www.com>
25 12 "maynard kang" <maynard@pobox.org.sg>
26 11 "rick h wesson" <wessorh@ar.com>
- 11 "jonathan rosenne" <rosenne@qsm.co.il>
- 11 "hollenbeck, scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
29 10 "russ rolfe" <rrolfe@exchange.microsoft.com>
- 10 "mark.andrews" <mark.andrews@nominum.com>
- 10 "kenneth whistler" <kenw@sybase.com>
- 10 "harald alvestrand" <harald@alvestrand.no>
33 9 "roozbeh pournader" <roozbeh@sharif.edu>
- 9 "lucid" <lucid@epa.secret.org>
35 8 "deng" <deng@pier.cnnic.net.cn>
36 7 "yoshiro yoneya" <yone@po.ntts.co.jp>
- 7 "ned.freed" <ned.freed@innosoft.com>
- 7 "makoto ishisone" <ishisone@sra.co.jp>
- 7 "karlsson kent -
keka" <keka@im.se>
- 7 "c
c magnus gustavsson" <mag@lysator.liu.se>
41 6 "william morris" <me@williammorris.com>
- 6 "wenhui zhang" <zwh6810@yahoo.com>
- 6 "gim gyeongseog-kim
kyongsok" <gimgs@asadal.cs.pusan.ac.kr>
- 6 "david r. conrad" <david.conrad@nominum.com>
- 6 "david c lawrence" <tale@nominum.com>
- 6 "d. j. bernstein c/o
james seng" <james@seng.cc>
- 6 "allen smith" <easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu>
48 5 "sherin alsoudani" <sherinalsoudani@hotmail.com>
- 5 "marc tamsky" <tamsky@www.tv>
- 5 "jim fleming" <jimfleming@prodigy.net>
- 5 "bill manning" <bmanning@isi.edu>
52 4 "tsenglm" <tsenglm@cc.ncu.edu.tw>
- 4 "sean x. zhang" <sean_xzhang@yahoo.com>
- 4 "rj atkinson" <rja@inet.org>
- 4 "mats dufberg" <dufberg@nic-se.se>
- 4 "johnny eriksson" <bygg@cafax.se>
- 4 "andrea vine" <avine@eng.sun.com>
- 4 "adonis el fakih" <adonis@ayna.com>
59 3 "zita wenzel" <zita@isi.edu>
- 3 "william
tan" <william.tan@i-dns.net>
- 3 "sun guonian" <sun@cnnic.net.cn>
- 3 "maurizio codogno" <mau@beatles.cselt.it>
- 3 "joel rowbottom" <joel.rowbottom@centralnic.com>
- 3 "erik nordmark" <erik.nordmark@eng.sun.com>
- 3 "deven kalra" <kalra@langoo.net>
- 3 "carl s. gutekunst" <csg@eng.sun.com>
67 2 "xiang deng" <deng@cnnic.net.cn>
- 2 "thaweesak
taekratok" <taekratt@gorgai.com>
- 2 "tan tin wee" <tinwee@bic.nus.edu.sg>
- 2 "paul
v. mockapetris" <pvm@a21.com>
- 2 "michael mealling" <michael@bailey.dscga.com>
- 2 "mark welter" <mwelter@walid.com>
- 2 "larson, matt" <mlarson@verisign.com>
- 2 "jeff williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
- 2 "florian
weimer" <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
- 2 "erin chen" <erin@twnic.net.tw>
- 2 "dlee" <dlee@icu.ac.kr>
- 2 "david leung" <david@neteka.com>
- 2 "dan ebert" <dan@enic.cc>
- 2 "bright fulton" <bright@alldomains.com>
- 2 "bob jung" <bobj@netscape.com>
- 2 "=?iso-8859-1?q?m=e5ns_nilsson?=" <mansaxel@besserwisser.org>
83 1 "zhu yu" <yu.zhu@i-dns.net>
- 1 "xiaodong.lee" <xiaodong.lee@usa.net>
- 1 "vint cerf" <vcerf@mci.net>
- 1 "vietanh" <vietanh1977@yahoo.com>
- 1 "tony hansen" <tony@att.com>
- 1 "the iesg" <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
- 1 "sung jae shim" <sshim@mailbox.fdu.edu>
- 1 "steve hanna" <steve.hanna@sun.com>
- 1 "steve atkins" <steve@blighty.com>
- 1 "stephen dyer" <steve@uk.com>
- 1 "shaun marquardt" <shaunm@mahjongplayer.com>
- 1 "robert" <robert@chalmers.com.au>
- 1 "randy bush" <randy@psg.com>
- 1 "mike astle" <astle@new.net>
- 1 "maruyama" <maruyama@nic.ad.jp>
- 1 "martin oldfield" <m@mail.tc>
- 1 "marco d'itri" <md@linux.it>
- 1 "mansaxel" <mansaxel@besserwisser.org>
- 1 "levon esibov" <levone@windows.microsoft.com>
- 1 "lee" <lee@pier.cnnic.net.cn>
- 1 "kenny huang" <huangk@alum.sinica.edu>
- 1 "jorge amodio" <jamodio@verio.net>
- 1 "jarallah
aljarallah" <jar@nativenames.net>
- 1 "james m galvin" <galvin@acm.org>
- 1 "jacob palme" <jpalme@dsv.su.se>
- 1 "j. douglas
hawkins" <dhawkins@walid.com>
- 1 "ian king" <iking@microsoft.com>
- 1 "gary krall" <gary@langoo.net>
- 1 "donald e. eastlake
3rd" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>
- 1 "colosi, john" <jcolosi@verisign.com>
- 1 "bob halley" <bob.halley@nominum.com>
- 1 "alfred novacek" <novacek@pop.idv.uni-linz.ac.at>
- 1 "alan barrett" <apb@cequrux.com>
- 1 "=?iso-8859-1?q?keld_j=f8rn_simonsen?=" <keld@dkuug.dk>
(117) 1 "=?gb2312?q?xiang=20deng?=" <deng_xiang@yahoo.com.cn>
附錄G. UNAME Draft原擬發表的投影片