Re: [DNSOP] New Draft Charter

What clause would DNS Root Anycast stability fall under?

		--Dean

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008, Peter Koch wrote:

> Dean,
> 
> > > 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.
> > 
> > I'm not sure what you mean to dispute. The text of the charter I quoted
> > cites "This will include root zone name servers, gTLD name servers
> > [...]" I don't think it can be made plainer.
> 
> the fact that name servers dealing with a certain level in the DNS hierarchy or
> with certain parts of the DNS tree are not or are no longer explicitly mentioned
> does not imply that they could not taken into special consideration where
> appropriate.
> 
> > The liason role is communicative; the liason communicates the consensus
> > of (in this case) DNSOP.  The person of liason has not previously been
> > the sole technical expert provided by the IETF. But if that becomes so,
> > this isn't what is described in the MoU.  The IETF technical expertise
> 
> IETF Liaisons are appointed by and report to the IAB.  There is an IAB
> statement regarding the IETF's Liaison to the ICANN Board of Directors at
> <http://www.iab.org/liaisons/icann/icann-liaison.html>.  Neither DNSOP nor
> any other IETF WG is mentioned there and is at the sole discretion of the
> IAB to consult with IETF WGs in its (the IAB's) role of assisting the
> Liaison in executing their duties.  I asked you to provide tangible reference
> (i.e. "chapter and verse") to support your view of DNSOP having a special
> role w.r.t. root server operations.  I fail to see this information having
> been provided.  Also, there was no support of your view. Therefore I consider
> this issue closed.
> 
> > People in favor of changing the charter indeed held the position you
> > describe. But my recollection is that the charter wasn't changed; those
> > people didn't have a consensus to change the charter that way at that 
> > time.
> 
> The sad fact is that me dropped the ball on the charter work.
> 
> > > Note however, that the charter as proposed would _not_ prevent the
> > > DNSOP WG from, say, updating RFC 2870.
> > 
> > Under what provision of the new charter would RFC 2870 fall under?
> 
> The general clause
> 
>   The DNS Operations (DNSOP) Working Group will develop and review guidelines
>   for the correct, efficient and secure configuration, administration, and
>   operation of DNS authoritative servers, resolvers, and DNSSEC validators.
> 
> would certainly cover this.
> 
> -Peter [with hat]
> 
> 

-- 
Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000   

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop