On Jul 10, 2018, at 16:09, Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> wrote: > On Fri, 6 Jul 2018, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> >> This starts a Call for Adoption for: draft-huque-dnsop-multi-provider-dnssec >> The draft is available here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-huque-dnsop-multi-provider-dnssec/ > > I've reviewed the draft. It seems to me this is mostly a description of > novel uses of IETF protocols and possible business models. I don't see > a strong case for publishing this as an RFC and have a preference for > DNSOP to focus their time on working on protocol/operations matters and > our communal backlog of that. I actually think the document is actually almost entirely operational; at least, it describes a set of operational and design considerations for deploying DNS services constrained by particular sets of requirements. I don't see it as describing business models, but rather how commonly-available commercial DNS services can be lego'd together. Having said that, see (further) below. I don't particularly know who the audience for this document is, but I'm pretty sure it's not me. So I'm not the right person to judge whether it solves a real problem or is pitched at the right level. I haven't reviewed the document in detail; I've just skimmed through it. I'm pretty confident that the authors know what they are talking about :-) > So I am not in favour of adoption, but I would not object to adoption > either if that's how others want to spend the DNSOP time. I don't know that the document would necessarily benefit from adoption by the working group. I also don't know that the working group ought to have the kind of concern about the topics that this document addresses that would cause it to seek editorial control. It seems entirely plausible that the document contains useful advice, however, and that the RFC series is a suitable place for its publication. I think this document is an ideal candidate for the independent stream. I don't see an obvious reason why it belongs in dnsop. Like Paul, my lack of enthusiasm for adoption shouldn't be interpreted as an objection. Joe _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
