From: Timothy Mcsweeney 
Subject: [IAB] IAB appeal for arpa assignment
Date: July 30, 2020 at 8:16:57 PM PDT
To: iab, ietf 

Hello IAB, 

Section 5 of RFC3405 says "
Registrations for the 'URI.ARPA' zone are sent to
           'register@URI.ARPA'.

I did that on 4/7/2020, IANA ticket #1167794 

Section 5 of RFC3405 also says "
If no objections
   are made within a two week period, a representative of the
   registration authority considers the submission to be accepted and
   enters that submission into the nameserver.

After two weeks there were no objections. 

Section 5 of RFC3405 also says "
 Objections are restricted to those that point out impacts on the zone
   itself or to DNS in general.  Objections to the URI scheme or to the
   URN namespace-id are not allowed, as these should be raised in their
   respective forums.  The logical conclusion of this is that ANY
   sanctioned URI scheme or URN namespace MUST be allowed to be
   registered if it meets the requirements specified in this document as
   regards times to live and general impact to the DNS.

You must put my submission in the uri.arpa zone. 

These are your rules.  I followed everyone of them and then some.

Thank you, 
Tim McSweeney

From: Wes Hardaker 
Subject: Re: [IAB] IAB appeal for arpa assignment
Date: August 3, 2020 at 4:58:19 PM PDT
To: Timothy Mcsweeney
Cc: IAB, ietf 

Hi Timothy,

It is important that an appeal sent to the IAB explicitly state what 
decision from the IESG that you're appealing.  I recognize it should be 
self evident, given recent history; but to ensure we do not misperceive 
your request, can you please clarify which decision you are appealing 
(if for no other reason than to form a proper document chain)?  And, if 
possible, explain why the IESG's response was incorrect in your 
interpretation (in other words, the underlying basis for your appeal).  
Is your appeal against the whole conclusion and response, or only parts 
of it, for example?

Cheers,
Wes

From: Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com>
Subject: Re: [IAB] IAB appeal for arpa assignment
Date: August 10, 2020 at 2:05:04 PM PDT
To: Wes Hardaker 
Cc: IAB, ietf 


Hello Wes, 
Hello IAB members, 
Hello IETF members,

This is to clarify that I am appealing the IESG's decision to not allow 
IANA to place my records into the uri.arpa zone.  Below I am presenting 
the facts behind my reasoning on why they should have allowed the 
assignment.  

The uri.arpa assignment procedures are specifically spelled out within 
RFC3405.  The administrative and operational management of the uri.arpa 
zone are undertaken by IANA as it states in Section 9 of RFC3405 [1].  
That Section also states:  
 The DNS records to be
   inserted in these zones are subject to the review process described
   in this document.

The only review process with a description in that document is in 
Section 5 where  an implementer is required to submit a registration 
template to the register uri mailing list so objections can be made over 
a two week period.  No objections were made to my submission. 
(IANA#1167794).

I also read the above as saying, there are no other review processes 
required for the submission of records into uri.arpa.  To further back 
this belief, any other such processes or documents would require a 
listing in the Resource Registry Matrix by agreement of the 2020 MOU 
between IANA and the IETF (Services section 1.) [2].  There is no 
additional listings in that matrix for the uri.arpa registry.  The IESG 
is charged with ensuring that these required procedures have been 
followed and any necessary prerequisites have been met [3].  The IESG is 
also the principle agent to the IETF to insure the technical viability 
of the standards created.  Because of this responsibility, any argument 
of oversight in regards to the IETF tree by the IESG should be directed 
back to the IESG and not be a cause to thwart new assignments. 

My application uses the entire DDDS and is very much simpatico.  The 
authors of the DDDS give similar examples in RFC3402 Section 6.1 and 
6.2(automobile parts and document identification services) [4].  This 
shows that the DDDS was expected to be used for a wide variety of 
services.   

I'm asking the IAB to have the IESG decision annulled and recommend the 
IESG allow IANA to continue processing my assignment request.  Thank 
you.

Sincerely, 
Tim McSweeney


[1]   https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3405#section-9

[2]   https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/ietf-iana-agreement-2020-15jan20-en.pdf

[3]  https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026#section-6.5.2

[4]   https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3402#section-6.1
      https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3402#section-6.2