Re: [dd] [Ext] Listing of mentioned potential desired extensions to today's DNS delegation

[Wes Hardaker <[e-mail]>]

Edward Lewis <[e-mail]> writes:

> Regarding any chartering conversation - are you seeking a list
> restricted to updates of the DNS for which there is a realistic chance
> of it being implemented based on current conditions or a list
> including "blue-sky" futures?  As an example of the latter, migrating
> to an entirely different wire-format?

IMHO only:

IETF BOFs have always had a conversation around how likely is the
success of the proposed work?  and how soon can it be tractable?  The
IETF generally takes a heavy evolution vs revolution approach and works
towards solutions that don't require a flag day.  This often means very
slow rollouts (see both IPv6 and DNSSEC) as a result.

So the key, IMHO, is to develop a path that makes future changes like
wire-formats possible which it really isn't now.  From what I gather
from the discussions to date is that one goal of the problem space is
define how to do other version signaling.  EG, a common reason listed
for new delegation formats is to specify a different transport (eg TLS),
which absolutely is a new wire format too, just not in the DNS part of
the messages sent.

For the charter (did I mention IMHO), I'd ask not "what can we fit in it
that will solve a huge problem?" but rather "what's the next achievable
step that will help enable future steps toward a larger goal?".

-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI