Brian Dickson recently reached out to one of the DNSOP chairs to raise some technical concerns related to the AliasMode functionality in draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-https.
Although this document has already passed WGLC, IETF LC, IESG Eval, and was approved and sent to the RFC Editor, I want to make sure that the DNSOP working group has a chance to discuss any lingering concerns. Accordingly, I have asked the RFC Editor to hold publication for now (note that the hold itself is not expected to delay publication of the document, which is blocked anyway due to missing references). As the document was already extensively discussed and approved, we should only make substantive changes if they are very clearly warranted (e.g something that would otherwise be an errata, or "OMG! That clearly doesn't work, 1+1 doesn't equal 17…") — this is *not* an opportunity to re-litigate existing decisions, make non-required changes, etc. I believe that Brian is on vacation this week, and I wasn't really able to parse his issue with the document, so I ask him to clearly state the issue on-list when he returns. I would like to have whatever discussions wrapped up within 2 weeks from then so that I can release it back to the RFC Editor. Pausing publication is an unusual, but definitely not unprecedented, step. Although we are able to make changes until a document is published as an RFC, once it is approved and sent to the RFC Editor, we should only make (non-editorial) changes in exceptional circumstances… I'd like to also thank the authors and WG in advance for their time and for keeping this discussion focused, W
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
