> On 7 Oct 2026, at 20:28, Roy Arends <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Whether it is good or bad, let’s agree that “Camel” has a special meaning in > this community: it represents a particular view about DNS complexity and the > cost of further protocol extensions. Whatever the merits of that view, the > cuteness of the name, or the contemporary rhetorical value it had, we should > not institutionalise it by making it the name of a working group intended to > be a neutral venue for DNS protocol work. > > DNSPROTO simply says what the WG does. It also makes the relationship with > DNSOP immediately clear: DNSOP for operational work, DNSPROTO for protocol > work. > > A WG name should describe the work, not take a position on it.
FWIW +1 to the above. I appreciate the camel reference and understand it is a serious reminder, but I would’t make it the name of the working group. Cheers, Jim _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
