> On Mar 24, 2017, at 8:17 AM, Petr Špaček <petr.spa...@nic.cz> wrote: > > On 21.3.2017 13:23, Ralph Droms wrote: >> Petr, thanks for your review and feedback... >> >>> On Mar 15, 2017, at 6:52 AM, Petr Špaček <petr.spa...@nic.cz> wrote: >>> >>> On 14.3.2017 12:28, Ralph Droms wrote: >>>> draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps-03 includes revised text to address issues >>>> raised during the WG last call and other editorial improvements. The list >>>> of issues, discussion and resolution are in GitHub: >>>> https://github.com/Abhayakara/draft-tldr-sutld-ps >>>> >>>> There is one substantial addition to the list of problems in section 3: >>>> the use of DNSSEC with Special-Use Domain Names. >>> >>> The 03 version is a very good one. >>> >>> I would like to comment on one side-effect of the changes: >>> The Summary section was removed and the text moved elsewhere. IMHO this >>> makes the document less understandable to a person who was not involved >>> with its development. >>> >>> For this reason I propose new Summary section, which would be basically >>> current 4.1.4. Liaison Statement on Technical Use of Domain Names. >>> >>> The reference to these two I-Ds can be at the same place as current 4.1.4. >>> >>> >>> So the new text would look like: >>> >>> 4.1.4. Expired Internet Drafts Relating to SUDN >>> /links to/ >>> [I-D.chapin-additional-reserved-tlds] >>> [I-D.grothoff-iesg-special-use-p2p-names] >>> >>> 6. Summary >>> As a result of processing requests to add names to the Special-Use >>> Domain Name registry, as documented in >>> [I-D.chapin-additional-reserved-tlds] and >>> [I-D.grothoff-iesg-special-use-p2p-names], the IAB initiated a review >>> of the process defined in RFC 6761 for adding names to the registry. >>> This review was identified as in the charter of the IETF DNSOP >>> working group, and the review has been conducted in that working >>> group. The Liaison Statement [SDO-IAB-ICANN-LS] notified ICANN of >>> the review, affirmed that the discussion would be "open and >>> transparent to participation by interested parties" and explicitly >>> invited members of the ICANN community to participate. >>> This document is a product of the IETF DNSOP working group review of >>> the registry process in RFC 6761. >>> >>> >>> I believe that original 4.1.4 nicely summarizes what this document is about. >> >> I agree that some of the text belongs in a more prominent place, to alert >> the reader to the process behind the document. I've opened an issue: >> draft-ietf-homenet-dot-03 >> >> Our proposed solution is to move some of the detail behind this document >> from section 4.1.4 to the Introduction. >> >> OLD: >> >> 1. Introduction >> >> [...] >> >> Special-Use Domain Names [RFC6761] created an IANA registry for >> Special-Use Domain Names [SDO-IANA-SUDR], defined policies for adding >> to the registry, and made some suggestions about how those policies >> might be implemented. Since the publication of RFC 6761, the IETF >> has been asked to designate several new Special-Use Domain Names in >> this registry. During the evaluation process for these Special-Use >> Domain Names, the IETF encountered several different sorts of issues. >> Because of this, the IETF has decided to investigate the problem and >> decide if and how the RFC 6761 process can be improved, or whether it >> should be deprecated. >> >> NEW: >> >> 1. Introduction >> >> [...] >> >> Special-Use Domain Names [RFC6761] created an IANA registry for >> Special-Use Domain Names [SDO-IANA-SUDR], defined policies for adding >> to the registry, and made some suggestions about how those policies >> might be implemented. Since the publication of RFC 6761, the IETF >> has been asked to designate several new Special-Use Domain Names in >> this registry. During the evaluation process for these Special-Use >> Domain Names, the IETF encountered several different sorts of issues. >> Because of this, the IETF has decided to investigate the problem and >> decide if and how the RFC 6761 process can be improved, or whether it >> should be deprecated. The IETF DSNOP working group charter was >> extended to include conducting a review of the process for adding >> names to the registry that is defined in RFC 6761. This document is a >> product of that review. >> >> OLD: >> >> 4.1.4. Liaison Statement on Technical Use of Domain Names >> >> As a result of processing requests to add names to the Special-Use >> Domain Name registry, as documented in >> [I-D.chapin-additional-reserved-tlds] and >> [I-D.grothoff-iesg-special-use-p2p-names], the IAB initiated a review >> of the process defined in RFC 6761 for adding names to the registry. >> This review was identified as in the charter of the IETF DNSOP >> working group, and the review has been conducted in that working >> group. The Liaison Statement [SDO-IAB-ICANN-LS] notified ICANN of >> the review, affirmed that the discussion would be "open and >> transparent to participation by interested parties" and explicitly >> invited members of the ICANN community to participate. >> >> This document is a product of the IETF DNSOP working group review of >> the registry process in RFC 6761. >> >> NEW: >> >> 4.1.4. Liaison Statement on Technical Use of Domain Names >> >> As a result of processing requests to add names to the Special-Use >> Domain Name registry, as documented in >> [I-D.chapin-additional-reserved-tlds] and >> [I-D.grothoff-iesg-special-use-p2p-names], a review was chartered >> of the process defined in RFC 6761 for adding names to the registry >> (as explained earlier). The Liaison Statement [SDO-IAB-ICANN-LS] >> notified ICANN of the review, affirmed that the discussion would be >> "open and transparent to participation by interested parties" and >> explicitly invited members of the ICANN community to participate. >> >> - Ralph > > Sounds good to me, thank you!
The updated text will appear in the next published rev of the doc. Thanks for your review and quick feedback... - Ralph > > Petr Špaček @ CZ.NIC > >>>> In the authors' opinion, draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps-03 addresses all of the >>>> WG last call issues and the document is ready to be forwarded to the IESG. >>>> >>>> - Ralph >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Mar 13, 2017, at 3:26 PM, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>>>> directories. >>>>> This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations of the >>>>> IETF. >>>>> >>>>> Title : Special-Use Domain Names Problem Statement >>>>> Authors : Ted Lemon >>>>> Ralph Droms >>>>> Warren Kumari >>>>> Filename : draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps-03.txt >>>>> Pages : 27 >>>>> Date : 2017-03-13 >>>>> >>>>> Abstract: >>>>> The Special-Use Domain Names IANA registry policy defined in RFC 6761 >>>>> has been shown through experience to present unanticipated >>>>> challenges. This memo presents a list, intended to be comprehensive, >>>>> of the problems that have been identified. In addition it reviews >>>>> the history of Domain Names and summarizes current IETF publications >>>>> and some publications from other organizations relating to Special- >>>>> Use Domain Names. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps/ >>>>> >>>>> There's also a htmlized version available at: >>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps-03 >>>>> >>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at: >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dnsop-sutld-ps-03 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >>>>> submission >>>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >>>>> >>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >>>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > -- > Petr Špaček @ CZ.NIC
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
