IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] "finding registered domains"

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Tue, 12 March 2013 20:47 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CDDB21F8CD6 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:47:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.799
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.041, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_INFO=1.448, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ELwoRgyKURtx for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:47:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (ow5p.x.rootbsd.net [208.79.81.114]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8768421F8CC9 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:47:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (dhcp-2430.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.36.48]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C94DF8A031 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 20:47:22 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 16:46:53 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20130312204653.GH41728@mx1.yitter.info>
References: <20130310042250.GE33497@mx1.yitter.info> <513F9076.4000707@stpeter.im>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <513F9076.4000707@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] "finding registered domains"
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 20:47:39 -0000

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 04:30:46PM -0400, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > 2.  Do either of the above proposals seem like a good starting 
> > point?
> 
> I'll need time to read your draft in more detail before forming an
> opinion. What is the other proposal?

The other proposal is an undrafted one, but it's basically what Phill
posted to the list earlier today: a way of indicating that you do
delegate or do not delegate to other organizations, and another way of
asserting that no matter what others say, they so are not inside your
policy authority boundary.

I suppose it requires writing up.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email