IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] followup and proposed actions: RFC 6761 interim and next steps

"Patrik Fältström " <paf@frobbit.se> Thu, 28 May 2015 15:34 UTC

Return-Path: <paf@frobbit.se>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 856F91B2BA6 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 May 2015 08:34:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.961
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.961 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 jrYukhCygHmH for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 May 2015 08:34:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.frobbit.se (mail.frobbit.se [85.30.129.185]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1AD161B2BC0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 May 2015 08:34:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.100.1.36] (44-0.dc.icann.org [192.0.44.0]) by mail.frobbit.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A930320709; Thu, 28 May 2015 17:34:25 +0200 (CEST)
From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>
To: Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 11:34:24 -0400
Message-ID: <84A971BE-E655-45C9-8256-8CD059B651D5@frobbit.se>
In-Reply-To: <7FBF3D8B-E340-4540-A8B4-4786FB3E39C4@gmail.com>
References: <0CB7A66E-B6C9-4FE7-8452-172A5CF48895@gmail.com> <F28C4DE3-12CF-462D-BB55-5A02CA364173@interisle.net> <47EE9472-3E0C-4FA8-A058-8A288675C936@uniregistry.com> <E3483DBB-7F69-4CEB-ACD4-545B3CF7D4E0@INTERISLE.NET> <7FBF3D8B-E340-4540-A8B4-4786FB3E39C4@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=_MailMate_4975CEF8-20DF-47D5-89D5-B990D49CD471_="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.1r5084)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/aFcyzDWoVMDhorgsObjhtr7H_2k>
Cc: dnsop WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] followup and proposed actions: RFC 6761 interim and next steps
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 28 May 2015 15:34:33 -0000

On 28 May 2015, at 11:17, Suzanne Woolf wrote:

> The IETF doesn't decide what goes into the root zone. ICANN does

The IETF decide what does NOT go into the root zone, while ICANN do decide what goes into the zone.

ICANN can only "delay" their decision of adding things by "not yet" saying "yes".

That's the difference I see.

   Patrik

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email