[DNSOP] A quick update on draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf / draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Thu, 18 October 2018 19:05 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CC87130DD4 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 12:05:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oWc3bwphUIT3 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 12:05:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x42f.google.com (mail-wr1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E036130DD3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 12:05:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id q1-v6so1965293wrs.4 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 12:05:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=/Oa3TEXChfSS5LWXD8eFhQhlwJ8htX9wENDV5xC3ggE=; b=kdndo5ncb9idGDxHkbVdog80PgaPhje55tLu/na+LfY1n7xyAAzBDrl1kd4ONskgPJ y1D9YDkX0J3Hwftve1fx1hNZx0TbcwLo8M41AdLElGEjGzfUXTh2ogho81czylTKJbwU TqNHBY5htPp7qbGOANbDZjHgzU/yTFE+VGaGa1AgLxXeIG6pjhg2b95lXRMbSvGbhRuR G+G3V9SIv2usXVrTBeqoOdFE3jITSTt4YqGH4/B0FRjyaaFqr6lV1V3zmF5Ho9Znzowk npB1ty5r4gGoZ+6KjMeH5zrgs+gYYz/1saq+9Pkx8Xbv0Cy3sxDw7zYK2pArITd1dqK7 DEUQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=/Oa3TEXChfSS5LWXD8eFhQhlwJ8htX9wENDV5xC3ggE=; b=nZFh564j38ZvrDp/GuVkpkJgZceDa0fL2jT9EBjPy3tjGNd34/76Fo8nawcfSVR618 DjVqRhyXB84KzeNDfMsL/sEi6DCtpbkBPbABbJF2lXAeCfKemXQSUjuMi0MXmUoiXCJK gnF9bV5B6eyVhzGAjDnpr+Hz+16BY+gKpocy1m6R5zcSPKOjvIr70c+EGx/zmnYaWURB wvy5t9Yy9HGLK25HQh6VhcWdURlq5xLIzQOsCTAAzSa4hRriA/K1ohpY++m0r0aJv2PQ rpvWtGwSOPKE1W/0c9VJiJsys5sYXR+1rCP8MqQE7n7aXFKf1cfpFWIWlL8wVPtSQ0Ec 8AIQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfognu1fzLW3LbzfrazV4ZfKD88Nu7ddXvkmWBQNNHn8E+KlSBf3I j9pLwhDK3PFfAXPvQyYWevUh6o/XyKuXC81VieVhqr7tUTgHkg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV625YflH95UHaZeUiBYhoybdUZ3N2ioQY3lpom9UqZDRM6Ky0SyNIOJo+FLDPbtDBwMUySIq8/AHZvXjwNCT6RU=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:444c:: with SMTP id x12-v6mr8940406wrr.143.1539889505903; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 12:05:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 21:04:22 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHw9_i+Hi_y2W+5sSLuZvtM0nLHVR=y5R--3D-UB2_W3TYJ8JA@mail.gmail.com>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fe35ec05788576ab"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/MR7gii_hHVPEJoobvzs6HuM5iRw>
Subject: [DNSOP] A quick update on draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf / draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 19:05:11 -0000

Hi there,

Dave suggested I send this out.

draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf and draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix have completed
IESG review.
Alissa is holding a DISCUSS position on draft-ietf-dnsop-attrleaf-fix -
this can be seen here:

Alissa (and a number of other ADs) feel that each of the (37!) updated
documents should be classified into 2.1. (TXT RRset), 2.2. (SRV RRset)
or 2.3. (URI RRset).

Basically, we need to go through each document in
figure out which class it falls into (TXT, SRV, URI), and add it to a list.
We then add a sentence to each of those sections saying "Documents in this
category include RFCxxxx, RFCyyyy, RFCzzzz".

Dave has stated that he is unwilling to do this work. Instead of having the
WG document simply stall, Benno and I have agreed that we would split them
between us. If anyone would like to volunteer to help out, we would not
take it amiss.

Please note that this is not a normal situation - in general we expect the
authors to deal with IESG DISCUSS (and other ballots) - but we wanted to
move this document along.

So, if you would be willing to take a few documents to classify, please go
to this spreadsheet:

Change the reviewer from Benno or Warren to your name **before** starting
the review (we really don't need multiple reviews of the same document!),
and then update the spreadsheet with what "class" of update it is. Please
have the review done by Wednesday Oct 24th.

Review help would be appreciated, but if you are not able to (I know people
are really busy before IETF week), Benno and I will manage...

[0]: Posting a public link to a spreadsheet.... what could *possibly* go

I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in
the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of