On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 08:40:51AM -0300, David Conrad <d...@virtualized.org> wrote a message of 72 lines which said:
> I am fairly certain the ICANN community (not ICANN the company -- > staff simply implements the policies defined by the community) will > create a clause in the next Applicant's Guide Book that says "you > can't request a name on this list defined by the IETF; if you have a > problem with that, take it up with them." Thanks for your message, I think it is very clear. > If ICANN (the company or the community) wants to make a statement, I > believe there is a liaison from the IETF to ICANN through which that > statement would go. Since we have this liaison, does anyone know if it was used to inform ICANN of this discussion (it seems the right thing to do) and to ask them if they wanted to comment? draft-adpkja-dnsop-special-names-problem is full of FUD about how ICANN could be pissed off by a decision of the IETF to add .something to the Special-Use registry, but did we actually *asked* ICANN about it? <https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/posted/?text=icann&source=&destination=&start_date=&end_date=> seems to indicate the liaison with ICANN does not use a lot of bandwidth... _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
