Re: [DNSOP] Current DNS standards, drafts & charter

i see no purpose in change documents, which would add to the set of 
things a new implementer would have to know to read, and then to read.

rather, we should focus on a DNSOP document set that specifies a minimum 
subset of DNS which is considered by the operational community to be 
mandatory to implement. any implementer can remove anything else and 
still be checklist-compatible when customers are baking things off.

if someone wants to implement iquery or WKS let that be crazy rather 
than broken -- on-the-wire patterns still described, code points still 
reserved, but unlikely to find anybody to actually interoperate with.

vixie

re:

Matthew Pounsett wrote:
>
>
> On 27 March 2018 at 03:49, Ondřej Surý <ondrej@isc.org
> <mailto:ondrej@isc.org>> wrote:
>
>
>     Again, from experience from dnsext, I would strongly suggest that
>     any work in this area is split into CHANGE documents and REWRITE
>     documents, with strict scope. Documents rewriting existing RFCs
>     while adding more stuff at the same time tend to not reach the
>     finish line.
>
> Does this include combining documents?  For example, it would probably
> make sense to combine some of the clarifications documents into any
> rewrite of 1034/1035.
>
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

-- 
P Vixie