On Tue, 23 Feb 2016, George Michaelson wrote:
Respectfully, I don't agree. the current shut-down is an ad-hoc decision. It needs the formalism to close it permanently
We first need these processes to produce results before we decide whether or not to close that door permanently.
I think the proper place for the queue is in another venue (ICANN) and their lack of a proper technical justification channel independently of our process is a problem, but its a problem in their space, not in our space.
And the intersection of that space is also working on updating the 6761 situation. The dnsop working group, the TEG/TLG, the IAB (via the iniip-discuss list), the GNSO, etc. etc. [Note: I am one of the two TEG/TLG liaisons of the IETF to the ICANN board. Warren Kumari is the other one]
Equally, if a proposal like the ALT namespace was secured, the special-names registry would be superceded by the ALT registry, which operated on a completely different basis with different consequences and costs. I don't think the special-use names registry should remain open on-hold, if we secure ALT.
The .alt is also not going to get secured before these talks have proceeded further with all stakeholders involved. So I don't think there is a rush in formally closing the frozen 6761 procedure. In fact, it could hinder the current process by the IETF forcing a decision on its own.
This is basically what I'd expect to say on slideware in the meeting. But we can do it here too.
Face to face time is rare. It also does not include everyone that's on the list. So where possible, discussion on the lists is always preferred. Paul _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
