[Dawn] Re: DAWN BoF Proposal

[Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]>]

Hi again.

 

OK. I put some times and names against the agenda. This is still a very
rough draft and I would be happy to hear from you or from the others on this
circulation anything like:

*	No, we need to cover “foo”
*	No, we need more time for “bar”
*	No, someone else should present on that topic
*	No, that person should not be a presenter because I want them to
chair the BoF

 

For me, there are two big issues for debate:

 

1.	Should DAWN remain “generic” and open for all similar discovery
problems? We could just focus AI agents which is what gave rise to the work
effort. But we could note that there are similar efforts arising in other
working groups (e.g., CATS).
The current DAWN documents and draft charter assume the generic, but it is
fair to say that most (all?) of the proponents see AI agents as the pressing
problem space. My view is that it would be a shame to miss the opportunity
for a general solution by focusing too much on one use case, and that the
work effort for the general solution is unlikely to be much larger.

 

2.	Should we move direct to a protocol solution based on a chosen IETF
solution (that is, DNS) or should we delegate that decision to the working
group? Several comments on the BoF and the draft charter have said “Yes, but
show us the solution you want to pursue.” But there are quite a few drafts
proposing a number of alternative protocol approaches. I think that most
(all?) of the proponents you see here would like to use DNS, but this is a
standard IETF “trap” (“Where’s your proposed solution” versus “Don’t ask us
for a rubber stamp”), hence the wording in the draft charter and the
suggestion to work on some foundational drafts first.

 

Speak later.

Adrian

 

From: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[e-mail]> 
Sent: 19 May 2026 11:16
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail];
[e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Dawn] Re: DAWN BoF Proposal

 

Adrian,

 

I was indeed thinking of having only the proponents (i.e., doc authors) for
now to focus. Obviously, there will be more discussions during the BoF (if
accepted).

 

The current BoF proposal is rather detailed, but it would be nice to have
the draft agenda more consolidated (e.g., with some duration estimates) and
I would like to understand all the intricacies of the BoF request to support
it at the first IAB/IESG BoF coordination call on the 26th.

 

I will shortly send a Webex invitation to all the listed BoF proponents
(i.e., more people than you suggested), hoping that a short-term notice will
be OK. 

 

Regards,

 

-éric

 

PS: if you are currently at the RIPE-92 meeting (I know that Jim is), we can
also chat here.

 

From: Adrian Farrel <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> >
Date: Monday, 18 May 2026 at 10:41
To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> >
Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>  <[e-mail]
<mailto:[e-mail]> >
Subject: RE: [Dawn] Re: DAWN BoF Proposal

Thanks.

 

A prep/discussion call sounds good.

 

Tempting to open the doors to the whole list (cc’d on this thread) but maybe
need focus?

 

Shall we limit to a few key document authors?

Me

Arashmid Akhavain

Dan King

Kehan Yao

Nic Williams

 

Any time or day for me.

Best timing for North America and Asia is the usual 3pm Liege-time.

 

A

 

From: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke=[e-mail]
<mailto:evyncke=[e-mail]> >
Sent: 18 May 2026 10:04
To: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> 
Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> 
Subject: [Dawn] Re: DAWN BoF Proposal

 

Should we have a call? The two of us or more?

 

So far so good but the stakes are high indeed 

 

Envoyé à partir de Outlook pour Android <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> 

  _____  

From: Adrian Farrel <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> >
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2026 10:53:08 AM
To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> >
Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>  <[e-mail]
<mailto:[e-mail]> >
Subject: DAWN BoF Proposal

 

Hi Éric,

As the BoF cut-off date approaches, I wondered whether there is anything we
should be doing to the BoF proposal at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bofreq-farrel-discovery-of-agents-workloads
-and-named-entities/

Let me know if you think any edits or additions would be helpful.

Best,
Adrian