On Jun 19, 2013, at 3:43 PM, "John Levine" <johnl(_at_)taugh(_dot_)com> 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.
As a concrete example, the EPP systems used in production by TLD
registries use extensions that are documented only in I-Ds, often
expired I-Ds, or in dusty I-D like web documents. If you look at the
applications for new TLDs on the ICANN web site at
https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus you
will find that nearly all of them plan to use EPP extensions not
described in an RFC. Most of these extensions should be utterly
uncontroversial, e.g., one to synchronize renewal dates among multiple
domains, or another to tell a client that its credit balance has
dropped below a threshold.
Assuming we care about stability and interoperability, wouldn't it
make sense for the IETF to spin up a WG, collect these drafts, clean
up the language, make sure they agree with the widely implemented
reality, and publish them?
I realize you were asking a larger question, but..
If we do, I volunteer to help collect, review, clean up, check and push them
along.
W
R's,
John
--
"Working the ICANN process is like being nibbled to death by ducks,
it takes forever, it doesn't make sense, and in the end we're still dead in the
water."
-- Tom Galvin, VeriSign's vice president for government relations.