IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Expiration impending: <draft-jabley-dnssec-trust-anchor-11.txt>

manning <bmanning@karoshi.com> Fri, 09 October 2015 02:26 UTC

Return-Path: <bmanning@karoshi.com>
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 0DC041B2A7E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 19:26:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.209
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.209 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NO_DNS_FOR_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 TCfF5tz0R1_c for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 19:25:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vacation.karoshi.com (vacation.karoshi.com [198.32.6.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C97C1B2A76 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 19:25:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vacation.karoshi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E3BEC515FC; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 19:25:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at karoshi.com
Received: from vacation.karoshi.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (vacation.karoshi.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iMcloDfoKcA4; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 19:25:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.32.4.206] (unknown [198.32.4.206]) by vacation.karoshi.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 71A66C515EC; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 19:25:03 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
From: manning <bmanning@karoshi.com>
In-Reply-To: <20151009011039.36478.qmail@ary.lan>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2015 19:25:04 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <90410066-79B0-4DDE-89F7-CE2BB5DA2307@karoshi.com>
References: <20151009011039.36478.qmail@ary.lan>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/iL6JHYjVVnmrgVGa__mC_mv00w0>
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Expiration impending: <draft-jabley-dnssec-trust-anchor-11.txt>
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: <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: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:26:04 -0000

perhaps…  I think (well it used to work this way) that regardless of HOW it comes under IETF purview, once it does,
it is no longer under the change control of the submitting organization. 


manning
bmanning@karoshi.com
PO Box 6151
Playa del Rey, CA 90296
310.322.8102






On 8October2015Thursday, at 18:10, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

>> In the past, when organizations found themselves in the same situation that ICANN seems to find itself in here
>> (at least as outlined by yourself, below)
>> they have done what ICANN has done and is trying to do now, which is to pass the document on to a neutral third
>> party for �safe keeping�.   One thing
>> the IETF used to do was insist that when/if such a document was remedied to its care, that it ALSO claimed change
>> control over same.
> 
> That would suggest it'd be more appropriate for the independent
> stream, wouldn't it?
> 
> R's,
> John
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email