Re: [ga] Re: [ALSC-Forum] Re: [GTLD Registries List] What is the accreditation status of registrars that made fake applications?

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

Thank you very much Sandy,

I apologize for not trimming that insane cc list before.  I was directing my
posts to the AL forum.
By not paying attention I over posted to this list and I am quite sorry.  I ask
that all of us follow our posting limit and I will endeavor to be more careful.

Sandy this stuff below is dynamite.

If we can give non technical oriented people a basic understanding of Internet
Protocol and how it comes to pass then we can begin the road to legitimacy.

As for just lurking at the ietf, I have been doing so for a year and I even lurk
under a different address.

So Sandy it would appear that we, as common users need an intermediary to assure
us that everything is working right.  On the other hand we need to do our best
to remain vigilante and watchful of you folks that write protocols.  It would
appear that we must rely more and more on our ISPs yet they seem more and more
self interested as time goes by and they consolidate.

Would you be so kind as to direct me to the RFC that is relevant to the ISPs
fiduciary responsibility to the user.  All I have found are general placation's
to the effect.

Sincerely,
Eric

Sandy Harris wrote:

> Eric Dierker wrote:
>
> Replying to one list, with insane cc list trimmed.
>
> > Thank you for your comments,
> >
> > 1.    When should a RFC be disregarded?  What is the criteria?
>
> RFCs come in various categories. Some of them (I'm not sure if this is the
> complete list) are:
>
>         experimental
>         informational
>         best current practices (BCP)
>         standards track
>
> Within the standards track, they go through stages. Proposed standard, draft
> standard, standard.
>
> The ones that have made it to actual standard gat an STD number in addition
> to their RFC number. They are listed at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcxx00.html
>
> These, you disregard at your peril. They are the official definition of how
> the Internet works.
>
> BCPs and informational RFCs are not standards, but usually worth paying
> some attention to.
>
> Experimental RFCs can be ignored unless you want to participate in the
> experiment. For example, there's an experimental RFC for the Photuris
> protocol to do key exchange for secure tunnels across the net. A few
> people, like the OpenBSD folks, implement Photuris and follow that RFC.
> Most people just implement the standards-track IKE protocol instead.
>
> In theory, proposed and draft standards could be ignored. In practice,
> quite a few companies or open source projects implement things that
> are still in those stages. Sometimes they implement things that are
> still Internet DRafts and haven't even made it to Proposed.
>
> > 2. If circumstances warrant differing from an RFC should one first
> > challenge the existing RFC?
>
> RFCs are frequently replaced, updated, or labelled as obsolete.
>
> If you have a problem with a particular RFC, search for the Working
> Group that deals with it on www.ietf.org, subscribe to their mailing
> list, and join discussions leading to an update. All IETF WGs are
> open to anyone interested, a practice I think ICANN should adopt
> instead of its restrictive Task Force approach.
>
> However, I very strongly recommend lurking for a few weeks -- getting
> a feel for the issues, the tone, and the players -- before posting.
> These are Working Groups; political noises that do not contribute
> to the work will be rejected, and perhaps not gently.
>
> So wiil technical nonsense that might be tolerated here. See, for
> example, a polite response to Fleming's "ipv8" stuff:
> http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12576.html
> or the more direct ones:
> http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12577.html
> http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12603.html
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html