I agree. I would be amazed if a 6 month feedback window was sufficient to get this through the formalisms.
-G On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 7:02 AM David Conrad <d...@virtualized.org> wrote: > > Rob, > > 4 weeks for ICANN (which? Organization, Board, Community, all 3?) to provide > feedback? (That feels sort of like the ITU asking "the IETF" for feedback on > an IP-related protocol document in 4 weeks.) > > As I’m sure both Harald and Warren can attest, ICANN processes, particularly > those for which a public consensus statement is the desired outcome, tend to > take a teensy bit longer than 4 weeks. Also, given how long it has taken to > get the -alt-tld draft out the door of IETF processes, 4 weeks might be seen > as a bit hypocritical. > > What’s the desired outcome here? The only possible outcome I can imagine that > could come from a 4 week notice period would be for individual entities who > happen to participate in/around ICANN to provide feedback, not for “ICANN” > (whichever facet you might be envisioning) to comment. Is that sufficient? > > Regards, > -drc > > > On Mar 7, 2023, at 10:09 AM, Rob Wilton (rwilton) > > <rwilton=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I wanted to thank the WG, chairs, and authors, for their work and patience > > with me on the alt-tld draft and to let the WG know of the next steps. > > > > Warren and Paul have posted an updated -22 version that addresses my AD > > review comments, and hence I will start a 4-week IETF LC on this version > > shortly (i.e., hopefully in the next couple of days - as soon as the > > liaison statement is good to go). > > > > Wes, Mirja, and the DNSOP chairs, and Harald have helped me craft a liaison > > statement to send to ICANN once the LC has started (which will be sent from > > OPS Area) informing them of the progress of this document, hence also > > providing an opportunity for comments via the standard IETF LC process. > > The extended 4-week IETF LC is to ensure that ICANN have enough time to > > review the document and provide any feedback that they may have. > > > > My hope, and expectation, is that the document will then following the > > standard IETF document approval and publication process. > > > > Regards, > > Rob > > > > _______________________________________________ > > DNSOP mailing list > > DNSOP@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
