Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-davies-int-historic-04.txt> (Deprecating infrastructure "int" domains) to Informational RFC

[Warren Kumari <warren@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 1:57 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

+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.

Oooh, I like this phrasing.

I think that we are using different words, and probably George and I are not using the correct historical statements, but that we are all in violent agreement.

Yes, I *think* that that is the case. 

I do think that Pete Resnick's "Pure procedural fussiness" changes make sense; while they might be "procedural fussiness", they are also technically correct (the best kind of correct).

W

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

--
last-call mailing list
last-call@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call

-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call