On Mar 23, 2017, at 10:00 AM, John R Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote: > Just out of curiosity, is there anyone in the homenet WG who regularly > engages with ICANN, through AC's or SO's or the like?
Possibly one of the two working group chairs. But how is this relevant? What's going on here is that we've stumbled over a gap in expectations between IETF participants and the general I* leadership, including ICANN. What the MoU says is pretty clear, although it certainly could have been a lot clearer, and perhaps many fewer tears would have been shed over this if it had been clearer. The problem is not that homenet are naive, or that ICANN is difficult, or anything like that. It's that we are treading new ground. This is ground we need to tread. If in fact asking ICANN for delegations in cases of technical uses under the MoU is the wrong thing to do, we should know that. If it is the right thing to do, we should have a process for doing it. If the way the document asks is impolitic, we should fix that—it's certainly not what was intended. I really don't know why we're arguing about this here.
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
