Re: Objection to Last Call - draft-ietf-eai-utf8headers-09.txt

["Frank Ellermann" <nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de>]

Charles Lindsey wrote:

> fixing the problem I shall describe would have repercussions in
>      draft-ietf-eai-smtpext-11.txt [EAI-SMTP-extension] and in
>      draft-ietf-eai-dsn-06.txt [EAI-dsn]
> (especially the latter), it should be construed as a formal
> objection to those as well.

[procedural nit]
IMO it is slightly beside the point to dispute the right to start
a "Last Call".  If it doesn't get out of hand ADs can "Last Call"
whatever and whenever they like.  Figuring out what the community
wants before stating what the consensus is is the purpose of this
exercise, a good reason for objections could be when the alleged
consensus is dubious.  

[technical]
Of course the EAI drafts to varying degrees depend on each other,
but I'm confident that UTF8SMTP (the SMTP extension) makes sense,
therefore I posted a draft with a normative UTF8SMTP reference
yesterday, <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ellermann-spf-eai>.