[discuss] A final revision of Problem Statement No. 1?

Patrik Fältström paf at frobbit.se
Sun Feb 16 07:05:18 UTC 2014

On 2014-02-16 01:27, David Conrad wrote:
> The key point is that the current functional decomposition of the
> root zone data management function is somewhat arbitrary to meet
> particular policy goals (whatever they might be -- my impression was
> that it was to keep ICANN from running amok, but that's just a
> guess). It may be that a different functional decomposition is more
> appropriate in the future, depending on what the policy requirements
> are.  IMHO, a key policy consideration should be to minimize the
> chances of a unilateral out of policy change, particularly in a world
> where the threat of breach of contract is no long applicable.

Any discussion on these matters must, I think, start by having
requirements written down, and then design. Not the other way around.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 291 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140216/6f1c0460/signature.asc>

More information about the discuss mailing list