In case it's not obvious, FCFS does require some minimal level of info so
people can find out more, but the harder we make it to register, the more
likely people are to distribute software and not tell us about it.
By this logic, using a FCFS 'registry' model implies at least enough
information (if not a requirement) for some of tracking the registrant
to confirm continued use, transfer, release or abandonment at the very
least, no?
To the extent that's practical, sure. There are plenty of existing IANA
entries that have little more than an e-mail address to contact for more
information.
But once again, if we start inventing hoops for people to jump through,
they won't. That's counterproductive since we have no control over what
they're doing, so we'd like them to voluntarily tell us.
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail.
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
