Re: [dd] [Ext] starting charter text for the DELEG BOF discussion

[Jens Finkhäuser <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

I'm new to this discussion (less so to IETF), having taken up DNS related responsibilities only recently.

I think the tight scope is a good idea, but the charter as proposed is phrased very well to allow for future work with a simple addition - in the deliverables, add a final deliverable:

- A document listing possible delegation extensions already under discussion or to be discovered during this work.
This need not be published as an RFC and may remain as an Internet-draft.

My reasoning is that if there is a list of future work, it implies a recharter may be useful. But it doesn't actually go and state that's the plan, which could rightly be seen as scope creep.

Jens

> Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]> hat am 06.03.2024 16:27 CET geschrieben:
> 
>  
> On Mar 5, 2024, at 20:31, Peter Thomassen <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > 
> > This sounds like there will be exactly 2 RFCs.
> > 
> 
> ... before rechartering. Yes, that was by design. The IESG sometimes (often?) prefers new WGs to initially have a limited work plan with the possibility of later re-chartering.
> 
> People on this list know that the list of delegation extension RFCs is likely to be much longer than just aliasing and transport signaling. The question is how to reflect that in the charter.
> 
> If this group wants to go with an open work plan, please propose explicit text about that. 
> 
> --Paul Hoffman
> 
> -- 
> dd mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dd