Below On 7/9/19 9:25 AM, Joe Abley wrote: > On 9 Jul 2019, at 10:07, John Bambenek > <jcb=40bambenekconsulting....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > >> On Jul 9, 2019, at 08:32, Jim Reid <j...@rfc1035.com> wrote: >> >>> 2. These policy problems are out of scope for the IETF. It deals with >>> technical and operational matters around protocol design and deployment. >>> Policy issues are handled in other fora - like ICANN. The IETF should keep >>> well away from the whois policy swamp. The wrangling over whois policy at >>> ICANN has gone on and on for 20+ years. It shows no sign of reaching a >>> consensus. Dragging the IETF in to that screamfest is not going to improve >>> matters. >> This creates a protocol and standard to facilitate voluntary information >> exchange. No more. If I want to publish these DNS records, it is not ICANN’s >> business. What we are discussing here is a workable standard should someone >> wish to. There is a policy backdrop, sure. That’s driving the need to move >> to a self-disclosure system without middlemen. > The principal reason for standardising this behaviour is presumably to allow > and promote interoperability. > > Interoperability is required for there to be a useful, common framework for > general data exchange: that is, data exchange between parties on a scale or > of a kind that precludes simple, bilateral agreement. To me, that's > indistinguishable from policy. The idea of both the IETF and ICANN working on > different policies for disseminating this kind of information is simply a > headache. The conversation is already difficult; I think there is harm in > making it more difficult. > > I agree with pretty much everything else Jim said, but really this seems like > the core issue: this seems like a proposal in the wrong venue.
If the proposal is to create a standard by which to put contact information into DNS records, what venue would you suggest? > > I also agree that without any widespread incentive to implement, test and > maintain, the data is going to be noisy and sparse to the point where it's > useless for any practical use anyway. You could say the same for SPF. > > Joe > _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
