[37718] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Stability of the Internet?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com)
Wed May 23 13:06:40 2001
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
Message-Id: <200105231716.RAA01311@vacation.karoshi.com>
To: rmeyer@mhsc.com (Roeland Meyer)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 17:16:19 +0000 (UCT)
Cc: rmeyer@mhsc.com (Roeland Meyer), bc@vicious.dropbear.id.au,
nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <9DC8BBAD4FF100408FC7D18D1F0922860E465F@condor.mhsc.com> from "Roeland Meyer" at May 23, 2001 09:22:23 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> > There is work being done in the IETF to create such a private
> > use TLD.
>
> Where? Also, this may bring on a jurisdiction issue with ICANN/DNSO. It is
> the ICANN that is recommending new TLDs to the DOC, not the IETF. In order
> tfor that effort to comply with WIP process, it should make attempts to
> surface within relevent ICANN activity as well. Otherwise, ICANN doesn't
> know about it and can't make appropriate recommendations. I'm very much
> involved in that area and they are invisible to every one, in the DNSO. This
> effects the open/transparent process and if they don't want to catch a LOT
> of political flak (consider this fair-warning), they need to widen the
> visibility of their effort. This effects ICANN policy directly and IETF
> isn't a policy org. They are a PSO, not a DNSO.
>
> --
> ROELAND M.J. MEYER
> /USG/DOC/NTIA/ICANN/DNSO member
>
The IETF work predates much of ICANN & DNSo work. Clearly
there has been too narrow a focus if the DNSo & ICANN do
not believe that others have considered the impact of entry points
in the DNS and that they have exclusive understanding of the
ramifications of controlling this space.
See RFC 2606
--bill
