Re: practical matters (was Re: tired of waiting)

[Andrew Wilson <a.wilson@elsevier.co.uk>]

Dave:
>  > i'd very much like to have a naming authority defined by the time we
>  > finalize the spec.  anybody willing to, uh, be it?
> 
> i'm willing to be acting name czar unless somebody outside AT&T can do
> it.  i think it _might_ be best to have a nominally independent third
> party handling naming.  that could well be one of the people (or a
> group of the people) on this list.

Forgive me for asking a redundant question.  For the record, what does
AT&T have to do with the formation and management of MCP and attendant
procedures.  (and MOO also??!)...

> as an alternative which is possibly too hairy to contemplate, we could
> make things a little more decentralized: set up a public, moderated
> mailing list for name requests; registration requests are mailed to
> this list.  if any list member objects to allocating, we vote or
> something.  otherwise, the name is automatically approved after some
> period of time.  this seems like a good way to keep the namespace
> allocation process open.  if you want a voice in the naming authority,
> you join the list.

Ay.