To:
brunner@nic-naa.net (Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine)
Cc:
lewis@tislabs.com, ietf-provreg@cafax.se, paf@cisco.com (Patrik Faltstrom), brunner@nic-naa.net
From:
Bill Manning <bmanning@isi.edu>
Date:
Fri, 2 Feb 2001 14:41:01 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To:
<200102022315.f12NFWn57877@nic-naa.net> from "Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine" at Feb 02, 2001 06:15:32 PM
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: Fw: WG Review: Provisioning Registry Protocol (provreg)
% Ed, % % The scope expressed in this charter draft mentions: % administration of the DNS, DNS Registries, Registrars, Registrants, % plurality of mid-level access modes (multiple DNS registries, and % multiple DNS registrars), R2R application interaction and other % rational boilerplate, % % and fails to mention: % whois (any varient) % % and declines to put non-DNS registration interests ahead of DNS registration. % % In my view these are attractive features of this charter, and I understand % from Mr. Seng's earlier repeated comments that he does not. % % If anything, the focus of the work will be sharpened by having to recharter % upon completion of DNS Registrataion work, if in fact there is a need for a % standard in some related or extended area(s). % % Cheers, % Eric Hum... perhaps the charter is a bit too broad. IMHO, "administration of the DNS" is way outside a registration protocol. DNS has an existing OPS wg (DNSOPS) and has existing protocols for performing DNS administration... -- --bill