Re: [dns-wg] one more effort on the NTIA response

[Barbara Roseman <barbara.roseman@localhost]

Title: Re: [dns-wg] one more effort on the NTIA response

Ed, I believe 9 addresses some of the proposed workflows published with the NOI. It was not in either the VeriSign or ICANN proposals, but was, I believe, in some of the other diagrams.

-Barb


On 11/10/08 10:17 AM, "Edward Lewis" <Ed.Lewis@localhost> wrote:

> At 8:57 +0000 11/10/08, Jim Reid wrote:
>
> >can I ask for your support on this latest version?
>
> I'd be okay with this, in general, except for two things.
>
> #1 - I'd be happier without 9 - I mean, just delete it.  (Why is it
> there?  Did someone believe there was a technical justification to
> add an organization?)
>
> #2 - I'd be happier if the list wasn't just a set of requirements but
> included some "here's a way to do it"s.  But then, this point is not
> critical.
>
> >9. There is no technical justification to create a new organisation to
> >oversee the process of signing of the root.
>
> --
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
> NeuStar
>
> Never confuse activity with progress.  Activity pays more.