Stephane, have you read draft-tldr-sutld-ps? I would be curious to know if you disagree with the specific set of problems enumerated there; I realize that you don't believe that there is a problem that motivates a change; my question is, do you agree or disagree that the things described in the document are problems?
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:46:36AM -0400, > Warren Kumari <[email protected]> wrote > a message of 115 lines which said: > > > We could -- it is entirely possible that this is not a solvable > > problem -- however, before we can make that determination, and even > > more importantly, before we can clearly communicate that to the rest > > of the IETF / IESG / <etc> we need to agree on what the *problem* > > actually is. > > But some people (like me) are not convinced there is a problem. RFC > 6761 is imperfect (like every RFC) and can be improved, but it works > (two TLD were registered through it). > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
