Not meaning to pick personally on Eliot or Paul, some of these issues are very difficult to separate.
> On Oct 17, 2022, at 11:53 AM, Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> wrote: > > > On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, Eliot Lear wrote: > > > Let's please leave Internet lawyering to lawyers. If people want a legal > > opinion on this draft, the IETF does have resources for that. > > But it is to the core of the ICANN / IETF divide, so IETF shouldn't wade > into ICANN territory. We don't know what ICANN considers an attempt to "wade into ICANN territory," and there's nothing the WG can do to resolve this question. Such questions are why we have liaisons, which the IAB administers for the IETF. There's a perfectly healthy liaison relationship between the IETF and ICANN, which we can ask to exercise when/if we have something specific from the WG to share. Our part is to stop speculating on the views of another independent body, and decide whether we need .alt from a technical (protocol and operations) point of view. Legal and liaison resources are available as needed, but none of those conversations will go anywhere without a concrete technical assessment. It would be helpful if we could focus on technical/operational impacts and on whether .alt would in fact solve the problems that the draft claims to address. Thanks, Suzanne (For the chairs) _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
