Re: [DNSOP] Special Use Names Summary

[Suzanne Woolf]

Hi,

Thanks Ted, and more formally:

The WG has adopted https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tldr-sutld-ps/ 
 as a DNSOP working 
group document. As Ted said, the original authors are working on a revision to 
it, based on the discussion we just had for a first set of changes. It will be 
posted to the I-D repository as a work item for the WG.

Now that we have a problem statement, the authors are editors on behalf of the 
WG. The goal is a version of the problem statement that can be published as the 
WG consensus Informational RFC.

Beyond that the next task is to reach consensus on what steps, if any, the WG 
thinks the IETF should take to change the situation we’ve identified. (The 
chairs will need to provide some guidance on the respective roles of the IETF, 
the IAB, and the WG, but that’s more for discussion of solutions than for the 
problem statement, and a brief note from the chairs on it is already in the 
works.) 


thanks,
Suzanne (for the chairs)

> On Oct 13, 2016, at 10:19 AM, Ted Lemon  wrote:
> 
> New version of tldr draft is in the works.   When done, criticism
> solicited.   Please, please bear in mind that the point of this
> document is not to say what to do, but merely to enumerate as complete
> a set of problems as we can enumerate.   The point is not that we are
> going to solve every one of the problem documented in the draft, but
> that we want to identify all the problems people consider important,
> so that when we start to think about solutions, we can systematically
> evaluate how each part of a solution would impact each of the problems
> we've identified.
> 
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 7:44 AM, hellekin  wrote:
>> On 10/07/2016 08:56 PM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>>> 
>>> Special Use Names Summary
>>> 
>> 
>> Hello DNSOP WG,
>> 
>> I let a week pass so that others can comment, but apparently this
>> summary didn't bring much of them.  Indeed I have a troubling issue with
>> it: how is that actionable?  IOW, what's next?
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> 
>> ==
>> hk
>> 
>> ___
>> DNSOP mailing list
>> DNSOP@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
> 
> ___
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Re: [DNSOP] Special Use Names Summary

[hellekin]

On 10/07/2016 08:56 PM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> 
> Special Use Names Summary
>

Hello DNSOP WG,

I let a week pass so that others can comment, but apparently this
summary didn't bring much of them.  Indeed I have a troubling issue with
it: how is that actionable?  IOW, what's next?

Thank you,

==
hk

___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Re: [DNSOP] Special Use Names Summary

[Ted Lemon]

New version of tldr draft is in the works.   When done, criticism
solicited.   Please, please bear in mind that the point of this
document is not to say what to do, but merely to enumerate as complete
a set of problems as we can enumerate.   The point is not that we are
going to solve every one of the problem documented in the draft, but
that we want to identify all the problems people consider important,
so that when we start to think about solutions, we can systematically
evaluate how each part of a solution would impact each of the problems
we've identified.

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 7:44 AM, hellekin  wrote:
> On 10/07/2016 08:56 PM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
>>
>> Special Use Names Summary
>>
>
> Hello DNSOP WG,
>
> I let a week pass so that others can comment, but apparently this
> summary didn't bring much of them.  Indeed I have a troubling issue with
> it: how is that actionable?  IOW, what's next?
>
> Thank you,
>
> ==
> hk
>
> ___
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

___
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop