[perpass dropped from ccs] On Feb 15, 2014, at 11:57 AM, Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> wrote: > At ietf87 it was planned to have a discussion at dnsop about this > continued problem of drafts that fall between operations and extensions > and the fact that dnsext closed down. Nothing happened at ietf87 or > ietf88. I hope to see this as agenda item for dnsop this meeting. > > We need a WG to discuss DNS innovation.
At the Vancouver DNSOP meeting when there was some discussion I thought was protocol development related, I got up to the mike asked if DNSOP was the right place for that discussion, being righteously indignant that DNSOP would discuss something non-operational. However, after sitting down someone pointed out to me that one of the common recurrent complaints about the IETF is that operators tend to get excluded and that maybe DNSOP is actually the best place to discuss DNS protocol development since that's where operators go. Perhaps DNSOP actually is the DNS innovation WG (if perhaps only as a seeding ground)? Regards, -drc
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
