Paul, On Jul 19, 2015, at 6:01 AM, Paul Vixie <p...@redbarn.org> wrote: > there are no hoops here. > people will register if they want to, and people will > check the registry if they want to.
For the people who want to register, an exclusive registry explicitly creates a discussion for everyone but the first registrant, i.e.: With a non-exclusive registry: Them: "Hey IANA, we're using .PAUL and here's the docs describing who we are and how." IANA: "OK. We'll add your information to the others already registered for that label." With an exclusive registry: Them: "Hey IANA, we're using .PAUL and here's the docs describing who we are and how." IANA: "Um, sorry. Someone else is already using that label." Them: "But we really like .PAUL and we have deployed a zillion instances that make use of .PAUL" IANA: "That's fine, but you're potentially creating an interoperability problem." Them: "So tell the other guys to stop, since we've been using .PAUL since the early 1700s." etc. This smells like a hoop to me. > so: offering someone a chance to register that a conflict exists does > not serve the purpose of advancing interoperability. It doesn't address the interoperability of non-interoperable domain name overlays. It does advance interoperability in the sense of improving the state of knowledge that the non-interoperable domain name overlays exist, how they operate, who runs them, etc. It seems to me that by making the registry exclusive, you're trying to put the IESG/IETF/IANA in the role of gatekeeper of the non-interoperable domain name overlays. Regards, -drc
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
