Tobias:
Thanks for the review. Really, the delegation id to the RIRs. which in turn
use the ICANN ASO to establish global policy.
Thanks again,
Russ
On May 16, 2013, at 4:56 PM, Tobias Gondrom wrote:
Hi,
I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for this
draft (for background on appsdir, please see
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate ).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may
receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before
posting a new version of the draft.
Document: draft-housley-rfc2050bis-01
Title: The Internet Numbers Registry System
Reviewer: Tobias Gondrom
Review Date: May-16
Status: Informational
Summary: I believe the draft is ready for publication.
Review:
0. The document is well written and I very much like that the document is
short and concise.
Comments:
1. One of two key sentences I took from the document is that its
self-described scope is "only documenting" the status quo. See Section 1:
"does not propose any changes...., but it does provide information about the
current... system".
When reading this, one question the reader might consider is whether to agree
with this scope-self-limitation.
For my review, I followed this set scope, so the question is then only does
the ID reflect reality and provide sufficient information. My answer to that
is "yes".
2. And the second key sentence is from section 5:
... "specified in the IETF/IAB/ICANN MOU [RFC2860], discussions regarding
the evolution of the Internet Numbers Registry System structure, policy, and
processes are to take place within the ICANN framework and will respect
ICANN's core values [ICANNBL]." So basically fully delegating that
responsibility to ICANN.
Personally IMHO, I would like to encourage the editors and the IETF to
actually take a more strategic and pro-active approach and consider also
whether any guided changes beyond status quo could improve the situation.
Are our assumptions for the current system still true? Can we reflect about
why certain aspects are as they are and whether we can learn from the past
about any improvements we should actively explore or consider? A pro-active
review of the overall situation including #1 and #2 might be useful?
Best regards, Tobias