Hi, On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 10:15:05PM +0000, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
MM: Sorry, Chuck I am not buying this. Insofar as we are talking about root zone management, we are talking about names. There is no "root zone" for numbers or protocols.
While I think we agree about the limited remit of this committee, it's also true that the whole Internet has a stake in the sorts of changes it is supposed to be looking at. In particular, I think all the OCs are likely to have something relevant to say. The canonical example was DNSSEC signing of the root zone. That doesn't just affect the DNS root, because there are big consequences for number resources (because of the reverse tree -- under arpa, of course, whose policy oversight lives with the IAB, but still) and for the IETF (because if there are problems with the protocol, that's where the changes are going to be made, and if there are BCPs to be delivered that's where they're going to have to be delivered). Given that the whole thing just advises the Board and can be reconstituted later if need be, I'm not too exercised about including a reasonably wide group of people. Also, of course, we should hope that the sorts of innovations that might involve this group would be relatively rare. But, for instance, there's current work afoot to rename all the root servers to give a little more room in the DNS priming query; and I'd like to believe that we all think maximal co-operation in making those sorts of changes is the sort of thing we can count on. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com