Re: IETF, ICANN and Whois (Was Re: Last Call: <draft-housley-rfc2050bis-01.txt> (The Internet Numbers Registry System) to Informational RFC)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Patrik,
At 23:25 18-06-2013, Patrik Fältström wrote:
I think this is the correct strategy, BUT, I see as a very active participant in ICANN (chair of SSAC) that work in ICANN could be easier if some "more" technical standards where developed in IETF, and moved forward along standards track, that ICANN can reference. Same with some epp-related issues, and also DNS-related, which I must admit I think has stalled in the IETF. When that happens, ICANN start to "invent" or at least discuss IETF related issues -- which I think is non optimal. But on the other hand, if IETF do not move forward, then what should ICANN do?

I'll highlight part of a comment from Steve Crocker:

   (I sometimes have to explain to my colleagues at ICANN who have not had the
benefit of the IETF experience that "let's send it over to the IETF" doesn't work. The IETF isn't a standing army ready to do ours or anyone else's work. Rather, I say, it's a place where the relevant people can get together to get
   their work done.

It is easy to see why there isn't significant progress about DNS-related issues in the IETF. If nobody volunteers to do the work the work does not get done. Whether the problems are acute enough to require surgery is not for me to decide.

The ITU does work as the IETF does not show interest in doing that work when it had the opportunity to do so. I would not worry too much about ICANN inventing as, to quote John Klensin:

  I don't know whether that is because they don't have time to write shorter
  reports or because they don't think the subject matter can be covered in
  more concise reports, but the pattern is clear,   When those committees
  cannot agree or discover the issues are, in fact, contentious, they
  typically recommend the creation of more committees.

Sometimes people either do not see the problems or pretend not to see them (I am not inferring that you do that). In the latter case I would be asked to explain why I think the problem is a problem when I mention it. I am somewhat suspicious when people who have much more experience than me do that. :-)

I don't know whether you have been following the URNbis discussions. That WG had leisurely discussions about the drafts since over three years. It has not been able to publish a single RFC. DNSEXT has been in shutdown mode since over a year. The call for adoption of a draft in DNSOP failed as there wasn't significant interest within the working group to do that work.

I'll ask a question to the other persons subscribed to this mailing list. Are there other active participants in ICANN interested in doing work in the IETF?

Regards,
-sm





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]