Re: [dnsext] Meeting in Beijing

"Patrik Faltstrom (pfaltstr)" <pfaltstr@cisco.com> Thu, 14 October 2010 02:52 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1999A3A685B; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 19:52:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.239, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1cQyLvAbtMw4; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 19:52:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC0203A6832; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 19:52:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>) id 1P6Dr4-000LzY-VP for namedroppers-data0@psg.com; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 02:47:42 +0000
Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com ([171.68.10.86]) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <pfaltstr@cisco.com>) id 1P6Dr1-000LzH-V8 for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 02:47:40 +0000
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlEFAIYMtkyrRN+J/2dsb2JhbACgVUwCcaEQnF+FSASKQYMJgmCBfg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.57,328,1283731200"; d="scan'208";a="200443612"
Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Oct 2010 02:47:38 +0000
Received: from xbh-ams-101.cisco.com (xbh-ams-101.cisco.com [144.254.74.71]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o9E2lcPS017606; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 02:47:38 GMT
Received: from xmb-ams-106.cisco.com ([144.254.74.81]) by xbh-ams-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 14 Oct 2010 04:47:37 +0200
Received: from 128.107.191.32 ([128.107.191.32]) by XMB-AMS-106.cisco.com ([144.254.74.81]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 02:47:36 +0000
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Meeting in Beijing
References: <20101013211518.GD773@shinkuro.com> <AANLkTimRJs1acFJDbQMOiuSVOLUZYGMByVyRE29WBW9+@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: "Patrik Faltstrom (pfaltstr)" <pfaltstr@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Thread-Topic: [dnsext] Meeting in Beijing
Thread-Index: ActrSihnMW0dTg9FSjaIXe4707KdXw==
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimRJs1acFJDbQMOiuSVOLUZYGMByVyRE29WBW9+@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1CA5D684-18BB-4C3A-908C-C9A8949CA0AC@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 04:48:11 +0200
To: "Ted Hardie" <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: "Andrew Sullivan" <ajs@shinkuro.com>, <namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 8B117)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Oct 2010 02:47:37.0891 (UTC) FILETIME=[298ADF30:01CB6B4A]
Sender: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <namedroppers.ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: To unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
List-Unsubscribe: the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
List-Archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

On 13 okt 2010, at 23:52, "Ted Hardie" <ted.ietf@gmail.com>; wrote:

> I would like to see time for discussion of paf's recent draft.

I think a discussion would be healthy. I will though not be in Beijing but will participate remotely.

   Patrik

> There has been reasonable list traffic to support having
> a face-to-face meeting discussion, but I don't think it
> falls into your "5 reviewers and WGLC" bucket, because
> at least one counter proposal has come in.
> 
> For what it's worth, I'm still chewing over his responses to
> the issues I raised.  I feel like the basic approach, "some firm
> description of the service is needed" is a point at which we
> agree.  But the registration methodology has its limits,
> as we have seen in many other URI-related registries.
> They are so easy to mint that it is hard to capture the ones in use,
> much less advise on their creation.  My tea leaves say the
> same problem will happen here if this method gets any popularity at
> all
> 
> I'm not sure yet what to suggest, but if we have extra time in the
> meeting schedule, I'm sure I would benefit from hearing others' thoughts
> on the problem space.
> 
> regards,
> 
> Ted
> 
> 
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@shinkuro.com>; wrote:
>> Dear colleagues,
>> 
>> At the moment, we have a very light agenda for the Beijing meeting.
>> These are the items for which we've received requests:
>> 
>> 1.  A brief presentation on a DNSSEC history wiki (with a solitication
>> for participation).
>> 
>> 2.  A discussion of draft-vixie-dnsext-resimprove-00.
>> 
>> 3.  A discussion of draft-yao-dnsext-identical-resolution-0[1|2].
>> 
>> We'd like people to treat (3) as though it's a WG draft.  Assuming the
>> charter we sent to the IESG gets approved, that document will
>> automatically become a WG document by virtue of the charter adoption.
>> We're being careful not to step out of process, however, and as of
>> right now, the document isn't strictly speaking on charter.
>> 
>> Our feeling is that a meeting of this sort can be completed within an
>> hour or so.  However, we find ourselves at the moment with a much
>> longer slot (currently, Wed. morning, for 2 1/2 hours.  We didn't ask
>> for that much; it is apparently mostly to deal with scheduling
>> difficulties).
>> 
>> I note, however, that we have a number of drafts that have been
>> lingering for some time.  This is mostly due to inertia.  Olafur and I
>> therefore propose to use the extra time as a breakout session to nail
>> down whatever changes are still needed in those lingering drafts.  If
>> we can get five committed reviewers for each document in the room, and
>> get the necessary text compromises settled, we can then immediately
>> send them through WGLC, and we would clear our docket.  We think this
>> would be a productive use of the time.
>> 
>> If you have objections to this plan, please let us know.  If you do
>> not so object, we'll take that as an indication that the plan sounds
>> sensible.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> Andrew and Olafur.
>> 
>> --
>> Andrew Sullivan
>> ajs@shinkuro.com
>> Shinkuro, Inc.
>> 
>> 
>