On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 07:35:47AM +0200, David Conrad <d...@virtualized.org> wrote a message of 73 lines which said:
> It assumes folks who are developing these non-DNS protocols > know/care about what the IETF thinks. It is reasonable to assume that many of them do not even know that the IETF exists. We should therefore outreach and engage with them (and not only liaise with large bureaucracies) _but_ it would be difficult to convince them to follow the IETF path if we cannot show them that this path works. If it takes dozens of emails just to rediscuss something that was already sanctioned by the WG (.onion...), it will be difficult for the IETF missionaries to convert the natives in non-DNS lands. [That's why I was never of fan of .alt: I think it will never be accepted anyway. People who "squatt" TLDs are rational.] > I agree on the need for less friction, hence my interest in trying > to find objective criteria. Lack of objective criteria pretty much > guarantees the same sort of discussion and 'heavy process' you're > complaining about. No, friction comes from the fact that some people see the IETF as a control center and not as a service, trying to use it to enforce their own views such as "ICANN should have the right to decide for every string in the root". _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
