[gnso-rn-wg] note on technical evidence

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

In several of the categories there was a pending requirement for  
technical evidence of the protocols capabilities.  I wanted to say a  
few words about my definitions for technical evidence of a protocol's  
capabilties.
In my experience, there is often a lot of disagreement between  
technical experts.  One of the reasons I value the IETF processes is  
that they try to move beyond those disagreements and beyond argument  
from authority by using extensive open discussion followed by  
decisions based on rough consensus and running code.  Often, when an  
analysis is required, these are done by the IAB and designated  
experts and then vetted in the technical community by open review  
before they become RFCs.
In asking for technical support on various questions of protocol  
capability, I suggest that we ask the IETF, through its liaison or  
directly, for the necessary analyses on issues like the safety of  
single LDH character TLDS.  Once these recommendations have been  
through the process and become RFCs we will have the basis for  
designating a decision as 'technical reasons'.  Short of this, I  
think we remain in the area of speculation and argument from authority.
Of course to do this we will have to propose specific questions that  
need to be answered.
BTW, I do not mean to argue that all technical issues can be resolved  
in this way, obviously some, like those being subjected to  
experimentation by the President's committee need a different  
process.  I am recommending that this procedure applies to issues of  
protocol capability - in those case we need to approach the body who  
controls the protocol and ask them to answer the questions subject to  
their own processes.  In the case of DNS that organization is the  
IETF and I believe that the official response to a technical question  
is an RFC.
One note on this, it is not certain that the IETF process can respond  
in the 6-9 month time frame that Mike has proposed.
thanks
a.