On 6 Feb 2017, at 11:43, Richard Hill wrote: > I agree with Patrik's comments below, except that I have not found any > substantiation of the rumors (which is not to say that they are not correct). > The list of inputs to the next SG20 meeting is at: > > https://www.itu.int/md/T17-SG20-170313-C/en > > I don't see anything that looks like a proposal to do what Patrik rightly > criticizes, but I may have missed something, or there may be something in the > pipeline that is not yet published.
Thanks for the information! paf > Best, > Richard > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: cooperation-wg [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf >> Of Patrik Fältström >> Sent: lundi, 6. février 2017 11:29 >> To: Cooperation WG >> Subject: [cooperation-wg] SG20 and DONA etc >> >> All, >> >> I hear rumors SG20 is moving forward with ideas on prescribing DONA etc >> as The Directory and Naming System to use, and that it is a replacement >> for DNS. And that there is an upcoming SG20 meeting. >> >> I personally find it being very important ITU-T in this case do not >> "select" specific naming mechanisms at all. There are numerous >> different systems that after being bootstrapped with the help of DNS >> and routing can act on its own. And it would be a disaster if ITU-T >> prescribe something at this time, unless the usage is very very >> specific and that harmonization really really is needed. >> >> If we should spend time on new naming and lookup mechanisms, I would go >> for some completely new architectures that do not have any kind of root >> (neither technical, nor administrative) and instead use things like >> opportunistic encryption and randomization to find identifiers which >> globally get to know each other via some ad hoc routing mechanism. >> >> paf
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
