> On 09/09/2020 5:44 AM Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I'm not sure what was meant by Rich's comment about IANA being hired staff but, when it comes to the DDDS, > you really can't get any more expert in an review without them. They already: > > 1. manage the zone > 2. manage the name registration > 3. manage the submission procedure > 4. manage the list for vetting registrations in the zone > 5. have an engineering team to report any technical problems > > > > > On 09/08/2020 1:37 PM Ben Campbell <ben@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 8, 2020, at 12:15 PM, Salz, Rich <rsalz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Does anyone else feel this way? I am opposed. > > > > > > It *appears* that this change removes the requirement for proper URI’s, or at least moves the responsibility to IANA, which is hired staff. > > > > > > I continue to oppose any approach that removes the requirement that the URI scheme itself go through an expert review. It seems appropriate that such review happen at the time of scheme registration (as opposed to the time of requesting inclusion in uri.arpa). The requirement for permanent registration of the scheme gives us that. > > > > There may be other ways to achieve the same thing, but they would almost certain require more complicated specification changes than simply saying “The scheme MUST be permanently registered”. > > > > Ben. > > -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
