Antwort: Pre-meeting notes

["Jörg Bauer/Denic" <bauer@denic.de>]

On 20.03.2001 16:51 Edward Lewis <lewis@tislabs.com> wrote:
>
> The provreg meeting at the 50th IETF will be held later today (1545, in
> Salon B).  I have been reviewing recent activity and have come up with a
> few questions for the group:
>
> 1) Do the design teams feel that they have clear goals?  I have heard
some
> comment that this is not the case.  I will refrain from requesting the
> teams address this in their short presentations today because of the
short
> lead time.
>
> 2) How close are we to having a stable requirements document?  The
document
> is in good shape, but every once in a while an issue or two is raised.  I
> think that we are close to consensus on the document.

(+1)
We have to move forward, even if there is some discussion going on.
Things like "unique names" or a more open look to different objects could
go into a Version 2 of the protokoll.

>
> During the meeting, I'll ask the room if there are issues just to gauge
> what is needed.  I want to refrain from discussing the issues, refering
all
> discussion to the list.
>
> 3) The definitions document needs work, and we need to decide whether to
> tether the requirements document and the definitions document or not.  If
> not tethered, the requirements document needs to define its terms, if
> tethered, the requirements document cannot progress until the definitions
> document does.
>
> Q: To tether or not to tether...

I prefer doing some work on the definitions document. It´s a clear
seperation and it will help with new papers.

>
> 4) One of the issues raised in the drafting of the charter is
> extensibility.  I feel that although the requirements document mentions
> this, extensibility isn't being addresses enough.  Are there a few folks
> (say 2-3) that would be willing to be a "design team" to keep an eye on
> extensibilty?  I'm looking towards the folks that most vocally supported
> the use of the protocol for not-just-DNS registrations.
>
> Q: Do we need this / who wants to volunteer?

I realy want that the protocol isn´t just usefull for domainnames, but i
think we first should concentrate on domainnames because there is the
biggest need for a protocol.

It´s important that the protocol has that ability to be extended but i
think this is something for version 2.
Maybe it´s easier to define the requirement of this extensibility with the
experience of a working system.

--
----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------

Joerg Bauer                       | eMail : Joerg.Bauer@denic.de
DENIC eG                          | Fon   : +49 69 272 35 180
Wiesenhuettenplatz 26             | Fax   : +49 69 27235 235
D-60329 Frankfurt                 |
----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------