Hi Tommy,

The draft draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error includes appropriate
extensibility mechanisms. I reviewed the new draft,
draft-nottingham-public-resolver-errors-00, and it does not require any
updates to draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error. In the future, we may see
other drafts proposing extensions to draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error.

I don't see a need to further delay this work.

Cheers,
-Tiru

On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 at 21:18, Tommy Pauly <tpauly=40apple....@dmarc.ietf.org>
wrote:

> Overall, I think this document, and its definition of the EXTRA-TEXT field
> as JSON is important. To that end, I am eager to see progress in this area.
>
> However, I think we should not quite yet ship this out of the WG.
>
> Two specific points:
> - I’d like to have a working group discussion with regards to the proposal
> in draft-nottingham-public-resolver-errors-00. While that doesn’t
> necessarily require being merged
> into draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error, it *could* be, and I would
> like to ensure with the WG that if they are separate, that there are no
> changes needed in draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error in order to support
> the details Mark’s draft is proposing. I think this incident/operator ID
> approach is potentially a very compelling tool to drive adoption of these
> errors across browser clients.
>
> - I am concerned about the IANA registry policy for the JSON names being
> IETF Review. (My concerns are slightly less for the other registries.)
> Requiring not only an RFC, but an IETF-stream RFC, seems like too high a
> bar. I would suggest Expert Review.
>
> Best,
> Tommy
>
> On Oct 26, 2024, at 9:10 PM, Benno Overeinder <be...@nlnetlabs.nl> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> The draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error has seen several revisions and
> there has been considerable discussion on the mailing list and in the WG.
> At IETF 116, Gianpaolo Scalone (Vodafone) and Ralf Weber (Akamai) presented
> a proof of concept of this specification.
>
> The authors and the WG chairs believe the draft is ready for a Working
> Group Last Call.
>
>
> This initiates the Working Group Last Call (WGLC) for
> draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error, "Structured Error Data for Filtered
> DNS."
>
> The draft can be reviewed here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-structured-dns-error/
>
> Intended Status: Proposed Standard
> Document Shepherd: Benno
>
> Please take the time to review this draft and share any relevant
> comments.  For the WGLC to be effective, we need both positive support and
> constructive feedback; a simple lack of objection isn’t enough.
>
> If you believe this draft is ready for publication as an RFC, please state
> your support.  Conversely, if you feel the document isn’t ready for
> publication, please provide your concerns and reasoning.
>
> This starts a two-week Working Group Last Call process, concluding on
> November 9, 2024.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Suzanne
> Tim
> Benno
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org
>
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org

Reply via email to