Subject: [dns-at-ietf] Re: managing workload within and across DNS WGs
From: Tim Wicinski <[email-masked]>
To: Philip Homburg <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], Paul Wouters <paul=[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2025 14:19:24 -0500
List-Id: "This list is to discuss the structure of DNS work in the IETF, and DNSOP in particular." <dns-at-ietf.ietf.org>

Paul W made a good point about .onion, .ZZ, .internal, etc - they sucked up
an amazing amount of WG time and energy.
Not for lack of trying, but it really points to a truth folks hate to
accept:

The Universe abhors a dingy painted bikeshed

As for advancing documents lacking implementations, we as chairs were given
guidance that it's fine to adopt a document
which does not currently have implementations, and are very happy to let it
drop if the implementations don't appear.
I see this in some of the v6 groups.

I will admit I personally held up the advancement of dns-structured-error
for more than a year waiting for more discussion on implementations
that we knew were done, but tucked away.  I am sure the authors were not
happy about this.
During our DNSOP chairs calls we regularly talked if certain drafts had
interest in implementing.
I found it useful to listen to Benno's guidance on these matters.

An early mistake we made in dprive was publishing DNS-over-DTLS where there
were no implementations, and the authors were *not interested* in working
on an implementation or attempting to work with developers on creating even
prototypes.

I feel like ADD had some similar issues with a few of their documents, but
my memory is hazy.

tim

(memories may be hazy)