> On Feb 1, 2017, at 3:56 PM, Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> wrote: > > > In message > <cahw9_i+8pa3fqx8fqw-xq_96it7k-g5urmb7fxarui1gwq+...@mail.gmail.com>, Warren K > umari writes: >> >> This is a fine thing to request in an IANA consideratons, but isn't >> necessarily *useful* -- the IANA has the technical ability to add >> stuff to the root zone, but not the mandate (this is like walking into >> a bank and requesting the teller gives you a bunch of money - they may >> be able to do so, but aren't actually allowed to.. :-)). > > Actually it isn't the same. > > Implicit in the agreement that the IETF can get names in the root > namespace is the ability to use them. Some uses require that there > be a entry in the root zone. > > It doesn't say that the IETF can "RESERVE" a name. The IETF gets > the name.
Can you please cite a source for this belief, so that it can be added to the “relevant documents” discussion in the problem statement draft? It seems to me that your interpretation of the situation has never been discussed, and there’s considerable reason to believe it wouldn’t have consensus support across the affected groups (Warren provided an overview of some of the reasons in his original post), but of course I may be overlooking something. thanks, Suzanne _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
