Re: [Add] The ADD WG has placed draft-box-add-requirements in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued"

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

On 27/01/2021 23:16, IETF Secretariat wrote:
> 
> The ADD WG has placed draft-box-add-requirements in state
> Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Glenn Deen)

I just had a read.

I'm ambivalent as to whether it ought be adopted. I don't
think it needs to end up as an RFC in either case. I guess
that the WG might have an easier time and be more productive
if it did not need to reach consensus on the text of this
draft. As I'm not sure that the WG needs to reach such a
consensus, in the end I'd be a little bit against
adoption.

If adopted, I will argue that we need a requirement that
clients should to be able to select a recursive based on
the client's evaluation of the network, e.g. I might like
a client that picked a well-known Irish recursive when
the client thinks it is in Ireland but does not pick a
local recursive when the client in in some other locale
renowned for censorship. I think stating such a requirement
would be in scope should this be adopted, whether or not
that leads to a need for some new protocol. (I could
envisage some futures in which some new protocol would
be useful to meet this requirement, perhaps if desirable
recursive locators changed very frequently, but equally
there might not be a need in the end, e.g. if clients tend
to include the required information as part of their install
and updates.)

Cheers,
S.

> 
> The document is available at
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-box-add-requirements/
> 
> Comment:
> Based on list and discussion during the January 27th ADD Interim this
> document is being put up for call for WG Adoption.
> 
> WG Call for adoption is open until February 10th, 2021
>