Re: [dd] [Ext] Charter - objectives and scope (long tail)

[Wes Hardaker <[e-mail]>]

Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]> writes:

> On Mar 23, 2024, at 14:26, Paul Vixie
> <paul=[e-mail]> wrote:
> > 
> > as a charter matter, i hope we can say that no existing signaling
> > (NS RRset and associated AAAA/A RRsets) will be obsoleted, and that
> > DELEG (or whatever new signaling is decided) will be semantically
> > additional. new signaling might add new servers but those described
> > by the NS RRset will remain "at the core" and that domain
> > delegations are expected to remain usable in the future even by
> > implementations who never upgrade. similarly, new signaling might
> > add new trust mechanisms or new transports but the old UDP/53 and
> > TCP/53 and TCP/853 transports are expected to be continuously
> > supported for those nameservers denoted in the NS RRset and
> > associated AAAA/A RRsets, without requirement for newly signaled
> > mechanisms for trust or secrecy or any other purpose.
> 
> I hear what you're saying, but I don't see a good place in the charter
> to say what the WG would not be doing. Can you propose text and say
> where it would go?

Multiple people have expressed concerns over ensuring backwards comparability.  I'm sure many believe this is a "of course" type requirement, but it would be good to be explicit.  So I added:

It will include a concept of operations that describes how both current and future systems will interact in an Internet-wide interoperable way.

-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI