[dns-at-ietf] Re: Discussion: big groups vs small, focused groups

["Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <[e-mail]>]

Wes,

You raised an important point where to send new/generic DNS topics/questions/drafts if the DNS field is split in laser-focused WG?

I have no answer...

Regards,

-éric

From: Wes Hardaker <[e-mail]>
Date: Monday, 27 October 2025 at 07:23
To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Wes Hardaker <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [dns-at-ietf] Discussion: big groups vs small, focused groups
"Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <[e-mail]> writes:

Eric,

Thank you for your constructive, well-thought out comments.  One follow
on question:

>  2. Focused charters are easier also (I hope) for participants to avoid
>     reading dozens of ‘not relevant’ emails per day

I think dealing with "not relevant" emails is a problem well recognized
by the IETF at large and we have always been challenged by
simultaneously wanting focused space while also allowing for freedom of
expression, brainstorming, and to promote locations where new
directions can be considered that will eventually lead to new charter
items, etc.

If we have some more focused groups or even bigger groups with careful
charters and tightly controlled mailing lists (for better or worse -- no
judgment here), where do you see as a good place for these more widely
thinking discussions to occur?  A dispatch list (new or existing)?  A
wider group like dnsop?  ietf@ietf?  hallways only?

> PS: I stared with saying this is “my AD input”, but for dns-at-ietf, it MUST
> be considered as any other feedback.

Agreed.  I do hope to hear from everyone, which does include chairs and
ADs (both current and past).  This is expected to be a consensus based
recommendation (if we can achieve consensus of course).

--
Wes Hardaker
Google