Re: [dbound] No meeting planned for IETF 95

["John Levine" <[e-mail]>]

If we're going to go back and revisit the question of what problem(s)
we're trying to solve, we can save time and shut down the WG, since
that's the place we've been spinning our wheels for years.  I don't
think that top-down vs. bottom-up in particular is a problem since my
proposal and I think Casey's can work either way.

At this point we have three proposals:

draft-deccio-dbound-organizational-domain-policy-01.txt
draft-levine-orgboundary-04.txt
draft-yao-dbound-dns-solution-02.txt

If people are still interested in this topic, it'd be a help if you'd
read the drafts, ask questions about stuff that is confusing, and
see if we can come up with a list of questions and comments that
distinguish them so we can perhaps see which one(s) address people's
problems best.  For example:


Is it OK that Deccio uses a new _odup top level domain?

Does Levine need to address some of the more complex cases that Deccio does?

Is it useful that Yao's design can refer queries to PSL like text files?

R's,
John