[eppext] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-eppext-keyrelay-11: (with COMMENT)

"Alissa Cooper" <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 16 December 2015 20:46 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
X-Original-To: eppext@ietf.org
Delivered-To: eppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6081F1A8A13; Wed, 16 Dec 2015 12:46:56 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20151216204656.14006.90329.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 12:46:56 -0800
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/eppext/KIPZN7zFKBsxtx-GY8OEcn5C80w>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 13:18:38 -0800
Cc: eppext-chairs@ietf.org, ulrich@wisser.se, draft-ietf-eppext-keyrelay@ietf.org, eppext@ietf.org
Subject: [eppext] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-eppext-keyrelay-11: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: eppext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
List-Id: EPPEXT <eppext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/eppext>, <mailto:eppext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/eppext/>
List-Post: <mailto:eppext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:eppext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eppext>, <mailto:eppext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 20:46:56 -0000

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-eppext-keyrelay-11: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


Agree with Stephen and looking forward to the IPR declaration being

In Section 1.2:

"The registry SHOULD have certain policies in place that require the
   losing DNS operator to cooperate with this transaction, however this
   is beyond this document."

This seems like a misplaced normative SHOULD.