On 22-Oct-22 05:22, Michael Richardson wrote:
George Michaelson <ggm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 2) why does IANA continue to "operate" the domain, if there is no
> dependency and no forseen use? The proper way to get shot of a burden,
> is to give it to somebody else. Re-delegate to ICANN and make them
> responsible for the registrar decisions about what treaty bodies are
> allowed to have state in .INT
+1
This documents gets out out of the house, and now that it's empty, the house
can be "sold"/rented/demolished-to-make-space-for-a-hyperspace-bypass.
I don't really understand what George and Michael mean, but in any case, the
future of .int is not the IETF's business, once we get this draft approved and
thereby completely separate the IETF from .int. Some other people somewhere
else can then discuss it.
Brian
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
