On 6/20/13 10:04 AM, Doug Barton wrote:
I agree with at least a little of what each of Olafur, John, and
Andrew have said; but I think there's a middle ground between "throw
the doors wide open" and "everything we have tried before didn't
work." At least I hope there is.
Well recall that we still have DNSOP, which along with the dnsext
mailing list once the wg is closed is probably a reasonable place to
get/look for feedback.
Perhaps we could have a non-WG mailing list so that people could
submit proposals for review prior to the expert review process. Even
some of the "get off my lawn" crowd offered good suggestions for this
EUI case (make 1 record with a size field rather than 2 records) that
could have made this whole process a lot smoother.
My impression of the outcome of the procedure change for the registry is
the wg didn't feel that there should be any particular obstacle beyond
expert review for registration. It is possible that reasonable people
should disagree on the application of given rr-types and that they
should be registered anyway.
In 30 years we've allocated ~120 rrtypes most of which we don't use
anymore.
Doug