On 4/7/13 20:34 , Russ Housley wrote:
Many of the comments that were posted to this list have been incorporated.
Please comment on the updated document.
1. Section 6 and the last paragraph of section 1 are mostly
duplicative, I'd suggest eliminating section 6 and merging it into the
last paragraph of section 1. In particular the part "and omits policy
and operational procedures that have been superseded by ICANN and RIR
policy since RFC 2050 publication." That is the only thing in section 6
that isn't already in the last paragraph of section 1. Unless you have
plans to dramatically increase whats in section 6.
2. Also, the references for RFC 1366 and RFC 1466 are missing.
3. Regarding Public WHOIS in section 4; The constituencies and
stakeholders for Public WHOIS are much broader than just the technical
community, a number of constituencies in civil society have legitimate
interests in Public WHOIS. I guess the main point I'm trying to make is
that Public WHOIS is more than just a technical issue, and section 4
seems to scope it as solely a technical issue.
I don't think you need to refocus section 4 from "Technical
Considerations" I think simply recognizing that there are more than just
technical considerations, especially for Public WHOIS, something like
the following should be sufficient;
2) ...have included consideration of the technical and operational
requirements, as well as requirements of other stakeholders, for
supporting WHOIS services...
Other stakeholders are recognized in general in section 5, but this is a
little different, this is recognizing while Public WHOIS is a technical
issue, it is more than just a technical issue. Whereas Reverse DNS is
almost entirely a technical issue.
Thanks.
--
================================================
David Farmer Email: farmer@xxxxxxx
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952
================================================