In message <c933fae9-fcf8-49ed-b57c-76305917a...@virtualized.org>, David Conrad writes: > Andrew, > > On Jul 10, 2015, at 5:52 AM, Andrew Sullivan <a...@anvilwalrusden.com> > wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 03:53:22PM +0000, Alain Durand wrote: > >> > >> - RFC6761 does not say anything wrt to coordination between IETF and > ICANN > >> on this topic. > > > > Or with regard to co-ordination between anyone else and the IETF. > > True, but the IETF hasn't entered into an MoU with anyone else on this > particular topic. > > > This is part of why I say the IETF retains the ability to take some > > names out of the DNS protocol or otherwise to alter the DNS namespace. > > I don't think there is any argument about this. The question is really > about the criteria, constraints, and how coordination will be done since > the implication of the special names registry is that it pushes the > "single root" of the namespace up one level. > > >> - RFC6761 does not say much about how to evaluate the merits of > proposals. > > > > I don't think that's true at all. It has the various criteria. If > > you can't explain how you meet the various criteria, then there's a > > problem. > > Wrong actor. Alain said 'evaluate' (which I take to mean how does the > IETF/IESG/community interpret the input provided related to the criteria > in 6761), not 'explain' (which I take to mean how does the requester > attempt to describe how they meet the criteria).
It's like the judge said "I know porn when I see it." Something are just subjective. This is why you have working groups not check lists for evaluating. > Regards, > -drc -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
