Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld next steps

I agree. I would be amazed if a 6 month feedback window was sufficient
to get this through the formalisms.

-G

On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 7:02 AM David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> wrote:
>
> Rob,
>
> 4 weeks for ICANN (which? Organization, Board, Community, all 3?) to provide feedback?  (That feels sort of like the ITU asking "the IETF" for feedback on an IP-related protocol document in 4 weeks.)
>
> As I’m sure both Harald and Warren can attest, ICANN processes, particularly those for which a public consensus statement is the desired outcome, tend to take a teensy bit longer than 4 weeks. Also, given how long it has taken to get the -alt-tld draft out the door of IETF processes, 4 weeks might be seen as a bit hypocritical.
>
> What’s the desired outcome here? The only possible outcome I can imagine that could come from a 4 week notice period would be for individual entities who happen to participate in/around ICANN to provide feedback, not for “ICANN” (whichever facet you might be envisioning) to comment. Is that sufficient?
>
> Regards,
> -drc
>
> > On Mar 7, 2023, at 10:09 AM, Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I wanted to thank the WG, chairs, and authors, for their work and patience with me on the alt-tld draft and to let the WG know of the next steps.
> >
> > Warren and Paul have posted an updated -22 version that addresses my AD review comments, and hence I will start a 4-week IETF LC on this version shortly (i.e., hopefully in the next couple of days - as soon as the liaison statement is good to go).
> >
> > Wes, Mirja, and the DNSOP chairs, and Harald have helped me craft a liaison statement to send to ICANN once the LC has started (which will be sent from OPS Area) informing them of the progress of this document, hence also providing an opportunity for comments via the standard IETF LC process.  The extended 4-week IETF LC is to ensure that ICANN have enough time to review the document and provide any feedback that they may have.
> >
> > My hope, and expectation, is that the document will then following the standard IETF document approval and publication process.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Rob
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > DNSOP mailing list
> > DNSOP@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop