On 2/17/14, 1:35 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
On Feb 17, 2014, at 1:15 PM, David Conrad <d...@virtualized.org> wrote:
Given experiences, I have to wonder if the whole idea of a long-term working
group just leads to dysfunction -- perhaps the IETF version of an echo chamber
(or perhaps even inbreeding). Perhaps a better approach would be to use
something like DNSOP which has an operations bent is use to see if there are
ideas/interest in particular topics that can drive the creation of working
groups that focus on the specific DNS-related issues?
Yup. However, creating working groups is a pretty heavyweight process—I think
that's what motivates the long-term model for protocols where frequent
extensions are likely. Possibly rotating working group chairs more frequently
would work in such cases.
The two dnsext releated items we covered in DNSOP were EDNS0 options.
Since OPT codes are now assigned by expert review, putting some of that
discussion where the largest collection of DNS experts reside has some
logic to it.
tim
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
