> Il 16/03/2026 10:05 CET Ondřej Surý <[email protected]> ha scritto: > > > Hi, > > I’m following up on this draft after some hallway discussion. What I’ve been > hearing > from the audience was that people feel this draft should not be adopted by > the WG. > > That said, it doesn’t mean this work doesn’t belong to IETF. There is a clear > distinction > between working groups and IETF at large. If there’s enough interest in > pursuing this > topic among vendors, ISPs, countries and other interested parties, there’s a > process > of chartering a new WG where the work could continue. > > Neither dnsop WG nor dnsop WG chairs are gatekeepers of any work just because > it mentions DNS somewhere in the document.
As I said during the session, I would be happy to help the authors understand better the process and the context so that they can make up their mind on any future steps. Indeed, to become useful, this document would need a much broader diversity in its authors and content in terms of geography, vendors / backgrounds, and approaches, and include references to past work on these topics (e.g. RFC 7754). I am unsure whether it is an effort worth pursuing, but if so, it could perhaps be proposed (dispatched) again as an informational RFC; if that does not work out, other venues could be found. -- Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange [email protected] Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
