Re: [apps-discuss] status and name

[Dave CROCKER <[e-mail]>]

With apologies, I'm going to try to follow a serious path in spite of that not
being what you intended:

    Note that the problem is not with ICANN but with the population of folk
making registrations.  THEY provide the initiative for the misguided model(s) of
name use..

    That fact can be an important lesson for anyone else doing work involving
name/string registration.

d/


On 11/19/2011 9:34 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Perhaps this could be communicated to ICANN.
>
> /me ducks
>
> On 14/11/2011, at 2:05 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>> On 11/15/2011 5:53 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> The same principle has emerged from discussions on the "Happy IANA" list
>>> (i.e., registration of parameters does not imply advancement along a
>>> standardization path). I sense a theme...
>>
>> It's actually closer to a principle.
>>
>> It is extremely natural to want names to carry deep semantics.  It's an
>> easy place to put parametric information.  Unfortunately it seems to
>> always create problems, most notably when there is a change in state, which
>> is exactly the concern we are dealing with in the draft.


-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net