DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[registrars] domreg BOF Meeting Minutes (fwd)



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:09:01 -0500
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
To: 'provreg List' <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
Subject: domreg BOF Meeting Minutes

Minutes of the domreg BOF
14 December 2000
49th IETF
San Diego, CA
Reported by Scott Hollenbeck <shollenbeck@verisign.com>

(Sorry for the repeat -- I'm sending it again to get a copy into the list
archives, which didn't pick up the message sent earlier today.)

The goals and scope of the BOF were described as follows:

This BOF will assess interest in forming a working group to develop a
generic registry-registrar protocol for use in shared registration
systems.  The goal of the BOF is two-fold:

1. To determine if a working group should be formed to develop such a
protocol, and

2. To produce draft goals and an outline for a charter if there is
interest in forming a working group.

The scope of the BOF will be limited to technical issues associated with
protocol development, including:

- Discussion of existing Internet-Draft requirements for a generic
registry-registrar protocol.
- Discussion of interest in forming a working group to develop a
generic protocol.
- Presentation of an existing published protocol proposal.
- Working group goal and charter development.

First presentation document reference:

The first presentation covered requirements for a generic protocol for
use in shared registration systems.  The presentation described the
how the need for requirements was identified, how the requirements
were developed, and the state of the requirements today.  At the
conclusion of the presentation the question was asked if the attendees
felt that the requirements draft represented community consensus,
noting that such consensus was apparently reached on the discussion
mailing list two months ago.  Comments from the floor were generally
positive about the state of the requirements, though one speaker
suggested some additional text at the beginning of the I-D to note
that the requirements were defined for a specific operational model
and that other models exist.  One speaker was not comfortable with
the requirements, though he had not provided any specific concerns
to the mailing list.  In the end it was agreed that a little more
work is needed to finalize the requirements draft before it can
be considered complete.

After this presentation the question was asked if there was
sufficient problem definition and interest in forming a working group
to develop a standards track protocol.  After discussion of the
anticipated purpose and expected outcome, the clear opinion of the
group was "yes".

Second presentation document reference:

The second presentation described a protocol proposal that was
developed to meet and exceed the requirements described in the first
presentation.  The presentation described the problem as more than a
domain name registration problem, but as a generic object provisioning
problem.  XML was shown to provide a way to define a simple base
protocol that separates object semantics from the protocol itself.
The presentation described a layered approach to manage transport,
security, and object provisioning.  Comments from the floor were
positive, with several people noting that such a general provisioning
approach is far more desirable than a narrow domain name registration

The final portion of the BOF was dedicated to brainstorming ideas
about the scope and charter of a working group.  The first point of
agreement was that the focus should not be only on domain name
registration, but on the more general problem of object provisioning.
A person from the floor volunteered a draft charter, and a few minutes
were spent looking at the draft to see if people were generally
comfortable with it.  There was some debate about the amount of time
needed to complete working group tasks, with the general consensus
being that people preferred to try to get work items completed as
quickly as possible.  Some minor changes were made on the floor, and
agreement was reached to continue the discussion on a new working
group mailing list.  It was agreed that both charter development and
requirements completion can proceed in parallel, with the charter
completion date targeted for 5 January 2001.

The name of the working group mailing list was quickly discussed, and
the name "provreg" (for provisioning/registration) was agreed upon.
A person agreed to create the list as quickly as possible, and the
name was announced to all: ietf-provreg@cafax.se.  Subscription
requests will be managed by majordomo@cafax.se.

Scott Hollenbeck
VeriSign Global Registry Services

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>