[Dawn] A reworked draft charter for DAWN

Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Sat, 20 June 2026 10:09 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: dawn@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: dawn@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CF4C104640AF; Sat, 20 Jun 2026 03:09:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1781950180; bh=e6nGsyLSZK/qu66L50+2uHzdFs88HMswi125fAAThDw=; h=Reply-To:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date; b=Vj1E22JmK6k7goM65ifxYc+mno1LisU42C31TvsTnbwCjXoovd4djuSlE7nsVN1Ro 5sZefok9dvQGCoiCHMFnZS5y1RShChS0I7gej1WXwVns6X8jKrRjLA2KOhUuacp5a7 3m8fJ8+h6ioTr2cweh8flwLnUSt40TBT1LAYbF30=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.796
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.796 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=olddog.co.uk
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SGtBOwPgNrxW; Sat, 20 Jun 2026 03:09:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta8.iomartmail.com (mta8.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.158]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90860104640AA; Sat, 20 Jun 2026 03:09:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs4.iomartmail.com (vs4.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.122]) by mta8.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 65KA9ZPE012927; Sat, 20 Jun 2026 11:09:35 +0100
Received: from vs4.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id F35074604A; Sat, 20 Jun 2026 11:09:33 +0100 (BST)
Received: from vs4.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id E761046043; Sat, 20 Jun 2026 11:09:33 +0100 (BST)
Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.224]) by vs4.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Sat, 20 Jun 2026 11:09:33 +0100 (BST)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V (82-69-109-75.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk [82.69.109.75]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 65KA9XBx000551 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 20 Jun 2026 11:09:33 +0100
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: dawn@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2026 11:09:32 +0100
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <05d101dd009c$e411c190$ac3544b0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Content-Language: en-gb
Thread-Index: Ad0AmrIyrwLktx5QReOe4l3akJpT5g==
X-Originating-IP: 82.69.109.75
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=olddog.co.uk; h=reply-to :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=20221128; bh=e6nGsyLSZK/qu66L50+2u HzdFs88HMswi125fAAThDw=; b=ltars4usLT9/3OwvnvCK+3cku/5LIAjErdh1s X/I/Jhacpxvoe1DeXxK3XTIV+jl+Nsc76A50SmHSJBPwDQsX7ArCeYxQAVngCYKr k0OolMcnbrIhqxPBE+zbOvY7ApDoo6tDYN1wx51kZsuK1pbTrBI/QhWU8bRPBKRB wHnYxKLBXmqcOinZs8K1wKq3LEdlq/IISBN5fbJHTqKV4BKYj1w4jd0mbWU+eBip xfzKvqACHCpfOYyqhyzq2pw05YOc35+v4TBqfvSmEzQM0nz9bU39jzae7kuPt+6a B0H/f8rg6uzLpD/0YgcKzUTttermFObE9xa94lJTLNnyQzIFw==
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-9.0.0.1006-29464.005
X-TM-AS-Result: No--12.624-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--12.624-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-9.0.1006-29464.005
X-TMASE-Result: 10--12.623500-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: i20fXLuMR8AOwAmmWH5kBBqkhv3OdF4DlDt5PQMgj00pTNAJDt3i5WJj g9GXn3itOmeki4s2H2HT6lH4RrlwgsUpocObN9PXAD5jSg1rFtC0BDVQCdH2d2taNN5IoqQRRKL a632yXzRW0R+Qf/paix89WAk1F5etUtG3fovCeXnv7rnu8XKYw8nlJe2gk8vIJs1nmlVDLIguuY 67k5gjTP6d3fiDekevM5ojAfE2AMVcGXxDZyrZdt5x7RpGJf1aNroBpCbt+GZEtBaWyPteE4bRi Geeokiz1Q/Joz0JDu72Y3KdQ7B9JOBLUjQcxaRgjHD5RTSnfNbrQvuXKii3Y7KeTtOdjMy6FhGY roscNQOTCKqFz8kfDYBf4GZza+3w8iKIRbg6mKJ9dWbpg7kae30tCKdnhB58vqq8s2MNhPDPPeN 6HN6d7MdwGuKIm8sZU6baA36eiazEQdG7H66TyKsQd9qPXhnJv/OGiTQ3mhkcVZgMmlblISXxEi q2hZ35KnBXs4PSws/rfcwrNcb1lA==
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Message-ID-Hash: OAAKTVX6W32O44FFK6YHIVYSM4Z6BDMP
X-Message-ID-Hash: OAAKTVX6W32O44FFK6YHIVYSM4Z6BDMP
X-MailFrom: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: dawn-chairs@ietf.org, "'Eric Vyncke (evyncke)'" <evyncke@cisco.com>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
Subject: [Dawn] A reworked draft charter for DAWN
List-Id: "The list is for discussion of the scope, use cases, requirements, and solutions for discovery of entities (e.g., tasks, AI agents, or endpoints) using IETF technologies." <dawn.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dawn/E9euuIr7ZmSk00cudDcLFT-coL4>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dawn>
List-Help: <mailto:dawn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dawn-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dawn@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dawn-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dawn-leave@ietf.org>

Hi,

Now that the BoF is approved and we have some I-Ds to fill in the
background, Wes and I have been working on the draft charter text for a
potential DAWN working group.

You can find the working copy at
https://github.com/danielkinguk/discovery/blob/main/charter/dawn-charter-02.
md 

First step was to halve the number of words (sorry, the initial verbosity
was mainly my fault).

Then we also worked to focus in on the distinctions between the WG's initial
focus and what might come later. This was addressing two key questions:

1. Should the WG work only on AI agent discovery, or should it be open to
more general "entity" discovery?
Here, we noted that most of the drafts that have been posted are dealing
with AI agent discovery, and the need for work in that area could be
described as "pressing".
On the other hand, it seems highly likely that in solving AI agent discovery
we could also solve discovery for a range of similar entities.
That leads us to suggest the WG should initially be focused on discovery of
AI agents, but that the WG is expected to produce results that are general
and reusable within other discovery contexts whenever possible.

2. Should the WG select between a number of possible solution technologies,
or should it build immediately on DNS?
A number of factors influenced us here:
- There is often a preference to use pre-existing IETF technology where
possible.
- A quick start will re-use or modify existing code, but can then be
developed along different lines.
- There are probably two stages to "discovery", the first being relatively
simple discovery, the second being the exchange and negotiation of
capabilities and other information.
- We are not certain at this stage that DNS will do the job.
This lead us to suggest that, "Where possible, any solutions work will be
built in a modular way using existing IETF protocols that provide support
for any needed communication, authentication and privacy. The WG will
consider the DNS as a likely initial protocol upon which to build a
discovery protocol."

We would very much like to hear discussion (or just words of
approval/opprobrium) on the charter text and these two questions.

Thanks,
Adrian (per pro Wes)