Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Document Adoption Poll (June 2022)

Michael StJohns <> Mon, 27 June 2022 15:39 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9B5BC15AAFB for <>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 08:39:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.781
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.781 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.876, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 nE7D1GrhsiQ6 for <>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 08:39:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f34]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56F37C15A75A for <>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 08:39:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id i17so15183927qvo.13 for <>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 08:39:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :references:from:in-reply-to; bh=17CClXxAk6lyVowoescG3khXTBgNBOEw4kCE5IwLtwA=; b=7qPkzCPN+hIqNnPfZq7N+yOfH+uj6uF0q5DqjApEB2TOswgBBfpLrfdowr1NHWD5vz 4qfXuLH08BvamZL1cAsyBxos+HAyfEbetxHwrBYhlBulJmya9ZTCjTlCXkj1SI40gnKt lyB9r4Z4+00UbG1Gksw6ZW5RjQk+CD/Pr32JIAK9T8BU4exJYOzKiE8Xj5ukJSkJ/dj5 trdc6cZTMbBU0BNM8KG55gP2jnQILot0sI37/xMFtQw/rbGo+V+YUHYj4yc9x28sj4Ef l7jJPYsilgwgdv93V0eYYAnBVW9hFmdo6+Ru2dWMMa40DNt2rfgySPf9Rl2RV+/sjdHM RJDQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:references:from:in-reply-to; bh=17CClXxAk6lyVowoescG3khXTBgNBOEw4kCE5IwLtwA=; b=YLfWPNudXQ1UW6ShderwxKMWBrkcncfM4S9hhiRgDmslfYLx6xSxiumRHkGj3g09UG KGoIeIAyGh/vGBchNY4GRAR4wVGww46kuYn4p0quz+Y/j/WbZJU3F3dgFhPrHi3RWUe/ Esl9Qxdn2EF2Gsur7EsBwqHiKAdy4QLOAHvVYnSCj0mLcuaTR2sOD7IgZ12wW9MTf1xH 0N/VljFwACGBDok7ZmXH1jJuAbJmQ/1Nk4Lh3PPVXb6fPJEa2Qw+5he++D0aqCqrLlfB IEoZpannDZVCejPR0JOMvTFnt1SUO7WrFVnn0M2wrwAqsebK8valyYtcV36Y1ZmfjA0z 84PQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora/K8WhezXy6oZj/hdLwm+8QsH80H3eExsgt6eOJ4Kt9luFCYSsV L4X74+gynfQlfnIwmH0k4T2Eg0nfz/3SbVx6
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1uOqWNJpVkSKQjZjCbSUDB/PVSnUn5HG9+jUvnAaJKCAeed7BT3kgKyzZ2MQc9q06ph74qguQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1dcd:b0:305:3456:6bca with SMTP id bn13-20020a05622a1dcd00b0030534566bcamr9844551qtb.594.1656344388629; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 08:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id v18-20020a05620a441200b006a701d8a43bsm425164qkp.79.2022. for <> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 27 Jun 2022 08:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------gNni2awL64OPIggN76vtSzWV"
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 11:39:46 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Content-Language: en-US
References: <> <>
From: Michael StJohns <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] DNSOP Document Adoption Poll (June 2022)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 15:39:54 -0000

On 6/27/2022 11:29 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> I think your instinct is correct, Tim. It’s not an optimization to 
> bypass discussion as part of a call for adoption. By asking us to 
> consider six drafts at once, and discuss none of them, you create a 
> strong likelihood of insufficient review.

+1 - the survey is not a useful approach.

I've been working down the survey (3 so far) and found that I needed to 
provide comments to match up with each of the selections (not easy to do 
in this form), and that I was missing selections for "not yet ready for 
consideration" (which is different than "adopt later") and "don't care" 
(which may or may not be needed depending on whether the survey requires 
me to make a selection - I haven't gotten to that point yet).   I think 
I also want to hear from everyone else so that the chairs' decisions 
actually have some context when I hear them and so I might craft a 
better response.

That said, I could see the point of a) a message with all six of the 
calls, and b) an individual page per each call with all of the comments 
on the calls and the votes - something easier than filtering through email.

Later, Mike

> On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 03:45 Tim Wicinski <> wrote:
>     All
>     We have six documents that have requested adoption from the
>     working group. My opinion is that we send out adoption calls for
>     all of these and let the working group sort it out, but was told
>     that is just crazy. Since Warren loves these poll things, we put
>     another one together on all the documents in question.
>     We'll run this poll for two weeks and end on the 9th of July.
>     However, we have a chai9rs call on the 5th of July and I'm
>     confident we'll have an obvious clear set of documents to begin
>     adoption calls on.
>     thanks
>     tim
>     _______________________________________________
>     DNSOP mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list