Re: [dnsext] DNSEXT closing down soon

[[e-mail]]

On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 11:38:54AM -0500, Ralph Droms wrote:
> 
> On Dec 4, 2011, at 12:52 AM 12/4/11, [e-mail] wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Ralph, 
> > 
> > 	wrt the "DNS Directorate" - if it is to remain, it would be useful to know
> > 	who is on it, and why.  What are the qualifications for joining/removal?
> > 	There are quire a few people qho are highly qualified DNS folks who are
> > 	not part of said directorate and it would be questionable to leaave such 
> > 	a censure board intact w/o due process.  I would argue that if the WG is being
> > 	disband, so should the rest of the support heirarchy, save the mailing list,
> > 	which is open to anyone.  YMMV of course, but I think leaving a directorate
> > 	intact, unaccountable to the  community, is a -really bad idea-.
> > 
> > /bill
> 
> Bill - I disgaree with your premise that the Directorate is a "censure board".  The description of the mission of the Directorate at http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/dns.html is consistent with current practice.  The Directorate is entirely advisory and in support of the IESG rather than any specific working group.
> 
> - Ralph
> 
> > 
> >> Thanks to Ed Lewis for asking a few salient questions.  We will keep the dnsext mailing list open to provide a forum for future discussion of dnsext issues.  I would appreciate any recommendations on how to promote awareness of the dnsext mailing list.  The DNS Directorate will also continue to provide expertise, advice to other WGs and review of IETF documents.  If some issue or issues rise to the level of IETF action, e.g., the work on aliasing, we will consider chartering a single-topic WG focused on that issue.  
> >> 


	thanks for the clarifing mail.  Since the DNS directorate is advisory tothe OPS and
	INT ADs and is not tied to any specific WG, I think the comments wrt a censure board
	are accurate.   Your statement ".. will also continue to provide expertise, advice and 
	review..." sounds like just such a body, absent a WG to provide balance to IESG/AD
	rule making.  Sounds like neither of us is swayed from our respective positions wrt
	the ongoing existance of a Directorate.  

	However on the demise of DNSEXT, I think the schedule is acheiveable and worthwhile.

/bill