> On 10 Jun 2019, at 17:04, Randy Bush <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I couldn't find out how to use the policy process to get RFC 7344 CDS
>> automation in place :-(
Tony, all you need to do is write a proposal and post it to [email protected].
I’m sure the WG co-chairs will be happy to advise.
> sounds more like education and engineering than policy. if not the dns
> wg, where may be lost in the s:n, maybe an ncc services request.
I’m not sure Randy. I agree a policy proposal and invoking the PDP might well
be overkill. And take forever to complete. However I expect the NCC’s DNS team
would be uncomfortable acting on a request from the NCC Services WG to do DNS
stuff which hadn’t first been scrutinised or approved by the DNS WG.
Another option might be for the NCC’s DNS team to come to the DNS WG with a
plan to support RFC7344 and get WG endorsement for that plan*. The same
approach could be taken to discontinue delegations to authoritative reverse
zone servers that have recursion enabled.
This is what we did several years ago when the NCC began to make an orderly
exit from providing DNS slave service for TLDs. That was discontinued for the
TLDs who could afford to buy that service elsewhere. Anand or Romeo would give
an update to the WG on how that was progressing. The DNS WG provided feedback
and approval. The NCC Services WG and the PDP weren’t involved. Though in
retrospect I think the WG could have documented this better than we did.
* A variation on this would be for concerned WG members discuss to this with
the NCC’s DNS team, work out the practicalities and develop a plan which then
comes to the DNS WG for endorsement.
