[dns-at-ietf] Re: Happy IETF-124 Wednesday! Let's talk about communication

[Shumon Huque <[e-mail]>]

I personally sympathize with a lot of the challenges Wes raises in his note.

I'm not sure if I'm out of the ordinary with respect to the DNS crowd, but
I try to attend a lot of IETF working group meetings in other areas
(particularly networking and security, and some app). I was also under the
impression that at least one of the goals of the IETF meeting week was to
foster cross pollination and exposure to different areas. Particularly for
DNS, which intersects with almost all other protocols, I feel it is
especially important for us to be aware of how other protocols intend to
use us. Making a large number of additional DNS focussed working groups
directly opposes such a goal. I do think that splitting the core DNS work
into operations and protocol development is probably a good idea, but I do
not think we should make any more. Already, I had a lot of difficulty
keeping up with DELEG once it was split into a new group (and I only just
caught myself up during this weekend's hackathon).

Regarding gate keeping work in DNSOP, if that's what we're doing (or giving
the impression of), we should stop, and allow more work to be heard. We
should also adopt more working group documents, as long as there is a core
group of folks interested in advancing them and have the cycles to do so
(and of course if there are no valid technical objections).

Maybe for "new work"  we should require the work to be floated on the
mailing list first and generate some level of discussion before granting
them meeting agenda time.

Shumon.

On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 7:33 AM Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 5 Nov 2025, at 6:24, Wes Hardaker wrote:
>
> > Which DNS related meetings have you gone to or will you go to this week?
> >
> > Which DNS related meetings will you have to skip due to conflicts?
> >
> > How do you go about learning what happened in the ones that you missed?
>
> Thanks, Wes. Related to this is how progress is made: WG sessions vs.
> mailing list discussion. Is the DNS community different on this than other
> IETF communities?
>
> My personal view is that we tend to gate work on session meetings more
> than, say, the Security Area (where I was much more active in the past).
> Maybe having more DNSish WGs help break this pattern for at least part of
> the work, and thus get more things through the IETF process, regardless of
> whether it causes more or fewer meeting conflicts.
>
> --Paul Hoffman
>
> _______________________________________________
> dns-at-ietf mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>