On Aug 20, 2012, at 6:19 AM, Peter Koch <p...@denic.de> wrote: > Andrew, > >> In the archives since the meeting, I observe some comments at >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg09783.html. But >> I do not observe the announcement of a WGLC. I am wondering when we >> might expect that call. > > both chairs have taken advantage of the season at least a bit. One > of the chairs has recused himself being a co-editor, so this is > the document shepherd. Issuing the WGLC involves reviewing the > draft as well as the recent discussion to generate framing questions. > > In this particular case, several members of the WG, some of which > I remember having been in favour of WGLC during the Vancouver > meeting, had expressed support for a major change to the draft > suggested by Matthijs Mekking on July 24 > <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop/current/msg09767.html> > That would basically mean folding significant parts of 'keytiming bis' > into the current 'key timing' draft.
That was my (probably biased) memory as well. > My current reading of the sense of the WG is that we move to > WGLC with -03, declaring the July 24 suggestion out of scope > for this document and keep momentum for 'dnssec bis'. That's one way to do it. A better one would be to start WG LC on key-timing with an explicit question to the WG about folding in the keytiming-bis changes. That way, the WG would know the status of both, and we would would possibly produce just one document. The operations community would be better off with just one document, if this WG can do that. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
