Re: [DNSOP] New Draft Charter

[Peter Koch <[e-mail]>]

Dean,

> So root and gTLD DNS server operations supervision is off the charter?  

to the extent that is has never been there, yes.

> It used to be the first item.  This appears to affect ISOC IETF
> commitments to ICANN to provide this technical role.

If you could support this observation by tangible textual reference, that would
be appreciated. As a side note, there is an IETF liaison to ICANN, independent
of whatever WG charter.

> 1. Define the processes by which Domain Name System (DNS) software
>       may be efficiently and correctly administered, configured, and
>       operated on Internet networks. This will include root zone
>       name servers, gTLD name servers, name servers for other DNS
>       zones, iterative DNS resolvers, and recursive DNS resolvers.

My recollection of the previous discussion of this exact issue is that
people were in favour of not mentioning any particular systems in the
hierarchy especially to avoid the perception conveyed above.  Note however,
that the charter as proposed would _not_ prevent the DNSOP WG from, say,
updating RFC 2870.

-Peter
_________________From [e-mail]  Tue Mar 11 08:18:36 2008
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
X-Original-To: [e-mail]
Delivered-To: [e-mail]
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 145F328C0F9;
	Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:18:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.566
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5
	tests=[AWL=-0.129, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451,
	HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
	by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id GbReyi7WhVQ4; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:18:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82E673A6E14;
	Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:18:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: [e-mail]
Delivered-To: [e-mail]
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAB163A688F
	for <[e-mail]>; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:18:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
	by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 6i9hkv4JlORI for <[e-mail]>;
	Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from office.denic.de (gw-office.denic.de [81.91.160.182])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2166728C39F
	for <[e-mail]>; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 08:18:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from x27.adm.denic.de ([10.122.64.128])
	by office.denic.de with esmtp 
	id 1JZ6Cj-0005qR-Fb; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:15:49 +0100
Received: from localhost by x27.adm.denic.de with local 
	id 1JZ6Cc-0006gW-A2; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:15:42 +0100
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:15:42 +0100
From: Peter Koch <[e-mail]>
To: IETF DNSOP WG <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
	<[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] New Draft Charter
X-BeenThere: [e-mail]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>,
	<mailto:[e-mail]?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/dnsop>
List-Post: <mailto:[e-mail]>
List-Help: <mailto:[e-mail]?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>,
	<mailto:[e-mail]?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]

Dean,

> So root and gTLD DNS server operations supervision is off the charter?  

to the extent that is has never been there, yes.

> It used to be the first item.  This appears to affect ISOC IETF
> commitments to ICANN to provide this technical role.

If you could support this observation by tangible textual reference, that would
be appreciated. As a side note, there is an IETF liaison to ICANN, independent
of whatever WG charter.

> 1. Define the processes by which Domain Name System (DNS) software
>       may be efficiently and correctly administered, configured, and
>       operated on Internet networks. This will include root zone
>       name servers, gTLD name servers, name servers for other DNS
>       zones, iterative DNS resolvers, and recursive DNS resolvers.

My recollection of the previous discussion of this exact issue is that
people were in favour of not mentioning any particular systems in the
hierarchy especially to avoid the perception conveyed above.  Note however,
that the charter as proposed would _not_ prevent the DNSOP WG from, say,
updating RFC 2870.

-Peter
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop


______________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop