On 2014/12/09 14:11, Nico Williams wrote:
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 06:03:33AM +0100, Patrik Fältström wrote:
On 9 dec 2014, at 04:37, Nico Williams wrote:
and add a suitable reference to UTF-8.
Oh, eh, RFC7159 lacked such a thing. At least this one should be
non-controversial: RFC3629. (
)
Both of these are intentional, and we intend to keep them.
Regards,Martin.
--
#-# Martin J. Dürst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:due...@it.aoyama.ac.jp
___
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https
ail response system that requires the name of the file
name of the file??
Changed this to
name of the file to be sent back
Hope this helps,
Regards, Martin.
--
#-# Martin J. Dürst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:due...@it.aoyama.ac
[sorry to be late with my comment; traveling]
Not objecting to the general direction of the discussion, and in
particular Patrick's points about multiple registrations and
transferability from a registrant's purpose, but one comment below.
On 2022-08-18 14:59, John C Klensin wrote:
James,
R
On 2022-08-27 03:48, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Friday, August 26, 2022 14:32 +0900 "Martin J. Dürst"
wrote:
If it comes to court orders, then please note that courts and
lawyers and the like are perfectly able to deal with issues
with foreign scripts. (It may take some more
Very sorry to be late with my reply, and for not replying to the latest
posting from John Klensin in this thread.
On 2022-09-14 04:03, John C Klensin wrote:
James,
My apologies for not having responded to your note sooner.
I've been preoccupied with several unrelated things.
I greatly appreci
