[dnsext] WG state reminder

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Fri, 27 January 2012 21:39 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ADC221F8631 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:39:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.65
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.65 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.051, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UQ9xVTNtGYuk for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:39:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5F0B21F8675 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:39:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.yitter.info (69-196-144-227.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.227]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0FB991ECB41F for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 21:39:30 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:39:28 -0500
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20120127213928.GI17728@mail.yitter.info>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: [dnsext] WG state reminder
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 21:39:31 -0000

Summary: reviews needed on draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-bis-updates,
draft-srose-dnssec-registry-update-00 and
draft-srose-dnssec-algo-imp-status-00.


Dear colleagues,

Ed Lewis made an excellent suggestion for some updates on the state of
the WG work, so that it's clear to people what's outstanding.  Here's
what I know.

We have two documents, draft-srose-dnssec-registry-update-00 and
draft-srose-dnssec-algo-imp-status-00, that are not yet officially WG
documents but could turn into them at any time.  They exist in order
to fix the problems with draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-registry-fixes
(which is officially in IESG processing but is effectively dead).  I
requested on 9 January that people who reacted to registry-fixes
respond to those documents.  See
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext/current/msg12076.html.

draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-bis-updates is in WGLC now.  The LC ends on
11 February.  (see
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext/current/msg12129.html and
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext/current/msg12135.html).
We have had three reviews, two of which made suggestions about some
changes but generally supported publication, and one of which appears
opposed to publication.  More reviews are urgently needed, please.

draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0 completed WGLC and is waiting for
the shepherd to write the PROTO write-up and request publication.

draft-ietf-dnsext-dnssec-algo-signal completed a WGLC under its
(apponted, non-WG chair) shepherd some time ago, but there have been
comments since.  The shepherd was appointed because both of the WG
co-chairs, in their employment, reported to one of the document
authors.  The appointed shephed is busy.  Given that I am no longer
reporting to the author in question in my employment, I wonder whether
people still have a concern here.  Comments are welcome.

draft-ietf-dnsext-aliasing-requirements expired.

draft-ietf-dnsext-ecdsa is in IETF Last Call.

draft-ietf-dnsext-xnamercode is in IETF Last Call.

draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2672bis-dname seems to be hung up in the IESG.  I
have been following up on this matter.

Best regards,

Andrew

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com