On Dec 18, 2023, at 18:33, Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Dec 2023, Geoff Huston wrote: > >> I am in support of adoption by the Working Group. The process of peer review >> has proved to be highly valuable over the years and the result is generally >> a more robust framework for critical elements of the DNS infrastructure. > > I agree, but also understand the situation could be strange. What if the > WG would want some text but the authors representing the Root Zone > operator cannot or do not want to do this?
This is a very weird question. The authors of a WG document serve at the behest of the WG via the chairs. The authors never get to override WG consensus or, later, IETF consensus. > I guess at that point the > document would have to move to the ISE ? If a group of authors want to write an RFC that doesn't need to have IETF consensus, they should go straight to the ISE. This group of authors very intentionally didn't do that. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
