On 2012-07-16, at 10:53, Paul Hoffman wrote: > The use cases in section 3 are fine because they are use cases for > standardized things. Patrik's objections were (all?) about the "use cases" in > section 4, which in fact are business models, some of which exist today and > others which do not. > > I disagree that this WG needs to have a discussion of the latter as long your > use case document describes the three parties: "zone operator", "registry", > and "organization that might have a business relationship between those two". > Any discussion about the business model of the third party and the first or > second doesn't feel like a use case to me at all.
I agree. There are technical/protocol aspects involved in this idea which need to be documented and standardised. There are also changes required to the business ecosystem of the various types of actor involved in the maintenance of records in DNS registries. This working group's role is surely to concentrate on the former. There are other bodies whose mandate might allow them to address the latter. Joe
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
