Re: [DNSOP] request for adoption

Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> Wed, 14 November 2018 10:10 UTC

Return-Path: <jabley@hopcount.ca>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65579124BE5 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 02:10:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hopcount.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9FLUXOqortwd for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 02:10:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x129.google.com (mail-lf1-x129.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::129]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79BC2124408 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 02:10:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x129.google.com with SMTP id p6so11088875lfc.1 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 02:10:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopcount.ca; s=google; h=from:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=OX9P4wUqd7fCtqoeZ/yWIcIa5EHFa/yO1Ck+95rUNL8=; b=QTTXe+EfH/n9lR1+TDZfOFjnhCopOWxNgNm8vuMDvZ9chfTlFUJzJOQ2c+drqzUG/t aVD1AT6y9U2Ldpd0BzUeJ6Mga+fCkk2xhQxRpvxECYOZIme6z832TAp25QeyaJ9+lMuH u9XiLKN6fg1aLT6VeMHTLQd2qXMvxfQM1Ormc=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=OX9P4wUqd7fCtqoeZ/yWIcIa5EHFa/yO1Ck+95rUNL8=; b=qjYX+6Sde98Acu5LKT/9QcXzGPsh5ZgFtvr6NDC/UU7y87t9RnwZKUuWIgEqw+Kt/p BSWyx2b2Mh4GiDDlTlXhkiEpWc4NzPaH9HktGRv6XxDao5oOOgBeTBvgyCzBjECKFum9 FNRR/OdxXHUUMRrSCZHKqs2ImhlML9IaxF1JUpg3ErsnlNvsigeKYglVKgwq0WeZ6Sji vKSwjOf+shtZa5MFSP+2wvLGJCC7qN5VbcSEd0rong5zXFlKAKq8aUDHCgYYAmxGlkVH qjGdTnsQIqCsDcoVh7IUFoJeGSie8PTqdsxIrdg/vqoEIxt0bvDbIVfcdT7qObqyCDhK 3a8A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gI6zjC00rFTIfXZQtDGGeQoH+Q1khzwDerD/cCBk40Md1GiWkWo YFLUfw2RNInLvk2i1XYzPivuTY9j2E18VF/MqHBw/Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5fCpcXNw5ZIQq/mRDqmkfR36GM210i6hjORoIKTlWx+OmDhkR647DKaksb0lRYpaSwtADpVneQRqMqY6SdGPRE=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:e01e:: with SMTP id x30mr641436lfg.89.1542190207594; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 02:10:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from unknown named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 02:10:06 -0800
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
References: <87a7mefuz6.fsf@nic.cz> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1811130101010.9026@bofh.nohats.ca> <87pnv9ji3o.fsf@nic.cz> <79789BA2-0A27-42EE-8A65-FB5D32F5319A@hopcount.ca> <87d0r8q8no.fsf@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <87d0r8q8no.fsf@nic.cz>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 02:10:06 -0800
Message-ID: <CAJhMdTNoGvW=WFdkcPi7YP=zmkNX+jg20NxLdEx-_pPStF0t5w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
Cc: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, DNSOP WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/B_CzbpVw0anQSRbzvhUuXozuMpw>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] request for adoption
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 10:10:17 -0000

On Nov 14, 2018, at 12:02, Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>; wrote:

> The thing is that we want IANA to perform further updates on their own,
> and the instructions in the "IANA Considerations" section are intended
> to be one way: if the registry changes, update the module so and so. It
> would become more complicated if IANA was expected to figure out what
> changes had already been applied to the module.

Yes. That's what I understood. I support that.


Joe