Re: [DNSOP] IETF 111 DNSOP WG session II agenda updated

Shumon Huque <> Thu, 29 July 2021 19:04 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 438793A1670 for <>; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 12:04:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jNdjmsIzxUSQ for <>; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 12:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B42743A165C for <>; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 12:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id gs8so12371456ejc.13 for <>; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 12:04:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Ovz+lEimlqn4MiyPYKDz5sZl+TxTCd77DeqzYoxlv5M=; b=g8TZycf7xWT8SqXM9oEF7HafPLV7aJOH8HMqxxeDASbwW3LKNRLzI0iQHr9R5aQ+Iz ucrlxYBV8wCjeO1Y8cWTfrfNDrYrnH/2GYPD3xQKNd8JMzrxbxDyo+k9b3l5fmyKEjEy vDS+Eq2/NKygAAX/grTfQCAHMmFIVItz7Ok2iB9jWELA4H75MBgzrTAF2sipypxAe9L2 pdPRSB6gdTajL04z8pEt1lf9mkTB5OqL28eUC3w+YF3qML3uFSeONCw9WD6W4+UIEDyv yRYsyZY3pC8VnbeiDORBCdHOo/dF7TW0I4tVqe4481r97a8DNkMT2ip73uNWyTpJ6tHd ceYg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Ovz+lEimlqn4MiyPYKDz5sZl+TxTCd77DeqzYoxlv5M=; b=YoYLYwSFCK1QrRU1ovSo2zVP4pGCC0qCpvuG6r+ldr/EvG8g0CVBZUVgYPJrygiSVB 16Cd/TJjK87iJEeFx6c+ZBsjP/DHt4qMSIcViD7sZHNdjLvUITaa6I6j36ZAriHV/fvb NWMPUAk/3wSTPOQZV3uNFAMQ2Y9cHFpGcIRUR6bEyLUbg1uoN7KKkPhYz4NdufT5d8Wr gw/aCawQq6DZJac0J3KN1JxKbqUFCD1j6BSxbT8pzGFji16auFWkacVZydARfCxTgusn ReWqFbIJG47UAOxtKldc9t/UHOnqKjSWyYfX84Rw0dyrtzOIFUvhePOL2gH9H/fC3iXT vsYw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530eALnlXfuiW/rLjHq0WkKRTDAyaw9gRfQ/VJpl35l83H7MPTmz GMP6/L/JPvfIxxlsocf4eV6ty054XdidBdCw/0g=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwGSCDmqj9ar1Q/KH5Qlq82XhnLoJdrpi25VHhKw9cMQVYw9b4fMaTWElR7zSizIqZepSf9HK9Sry8vfu5AThM=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2bd0:: with SMTP id gv16mr6257318ejc.49.1627585476209; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 12:04:36 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Shumon Huque <>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2021 15:04:15 -0400
Message-ID: <>
To: Peter van Dijk <>
Cc: DNSOP Working Group <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000026aef305c847c660"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] IETF 111 DNSOP WG session II agenda updated
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2021 19:04:44 -0000

On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 2:49 PM Shumon Huque <> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 2:41 PM Peter van Dijk <
>> wrote:
>> This is not a comment on the specific draft at all. This is a comment
>> on WG process. It seems weird to me to discuss prioritisation -after-
>> we spend time talking about current and, especially, new business.
> I'm sure the chairs will answer you on process, but I wanted to state that
> I
> had actually posted -00 before the draft cutoff (-01 posted later was a
> minor
> tweak) and asked for agenda time then. The chairs apologized to me later
> that they hadn't responded earlier and said they could fit me on Thursday.

Quick followup - I'm happy to go at the end. I'm not even sure I was going
ask for adoption - this was more information sharing, and asking the WG what
I should do with this draft. So it need not impact the current work
discussion. (I am assuming the WG will not bless the BL method, so it is
to adopt it or a derivative, but I may be surprised).