[DNSOP] Summary of Call for Adoption on draft-hoffman-dnssec-iana-cons

Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 22 January 2021 17:12 UTC

Return-Path: <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 261C33A138F; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 09:12:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.088
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.088 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E_Y1LXyBtjDF; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 09:12:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oo1-xc32.google.com (mail-oo1-xc32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c32]) (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 AA2903A1356; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 09:12:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oo1-xc32.google.com with SMTP id n19so185744ooj.11; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 09:12:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=bCeVqad1K+4R9PyALDS4C2/ZLIQiYopumw61SVgJsQk=; b=PxJJ/gaEI5p+xAKjILqZip3qWyv2ehpTYyNAOt9DBe0pY0aw+2pAUahQ+eo+NatHtC wftT/JFLZQ7sCH2a7m8eIRXmZ5lWX2osQk1AXAnJEMXeArhvIrfnCQaGlsN9AsJLxnKE R++zI+hK1uMkHXr5B7syjlaQ9UpeAXO608FJxmiobKjl+d6Ew7YPu4upxtz0VVfghKr4 m+RHoCB0/jG+F+8taA5OzxtmrZ6B5CtJTyiobmwiUMDcHMQX4rQ+b8sde4ibCUB7DuIr MrH7zf1aK9IXeKzKuD2LIzH/FghH8rolZ0aeqXE3LNCz0FguFawE8tZicxNb63xZbDxT ITTA==
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:cc; bh=bCeVqad1K+4R9PyALDS4C2/ZLIQiYopumw61SVgJsQk=; b=dfNbjQfjUoim6Euk1ARNT5ym28xzFFtPktfxuTjfytvxusllfOPqUf9CdF+dA3FLaY s+fuNvOfqhI+UdNrD74+eyrg7oPR+KZmHCaBwUU8Bhr+kDUHtSWdEzxbw+BOBA7A3G2M +1VzdoIfk1TptpJK+YZ5VPE0xhYO8Zmsrt6hJVdjSdVZaTva5DL+aCZA9nRBGX4C613n sxuyMFqfjVFRPHgBPnfYKQAH+S0nK0ZKNb1108jrjfQkN1OPG1jvWxbYGd9uFT5pyEvZ VegUqFRYZcyOUNoz4YhXN5aCCwXn4ctjajV8pOAvs+nGQWhzyr3hrgu/vgHgOosgrIRE 99rw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5315ofZi9f9kFJSqhmb9PgK+VF805y1BqGIkKjytyipULY+Z5jSW 27jDcF/Jzh6KDZsdTrktPazr2ybtSiahq/UTXNJpRgIyOPc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJydRL42YEm7nueikbCWwS9v3w0WcQdlWbJfZJ2bPz1OXVqEJ6LciaAQr2JwnXNYtN+sqkvhSw/oR5zQsD8ZBgg=
X-Received: by 2002:a4a:98e7:: with SMTP id b36mr4471202ooj.3.1611335539601; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 09:12:19 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 12:12:09 -0500
Message-ID: <CADyWQ+EKaPmT8Fe4TrLn7xqxAp7Cq3GcZBwnsg1_iVMRY24VZA@mail.gmail.com>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Cc: dnsop-chairs <dnsop-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000073b53305b9804aaa"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/bKOgUjjbfGaUHHlJiRYf8X6UlKE>
Subject: [DNSOP] Summary of Call for Adoption on draft-hoffman-dnssec-iana-cons
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: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 17:12:22 -0000

All

Thanks for your patience in getting back to you the resolution of this
document.   I had concerns about adopting the document in its current
form,  which was my motivation for the suggestions on splitting the
registry.  That spurred some healthy discussion.   I also like the idea of
integrating the valuable guidance from RFC8624.

The chairs talked this over, and we explained it to Paul last week.

Based on the discussion from the working group, we are good with the
working group adopting this document *If and Only If*:

- Part of the registry is split off into a section with different
requirements.

- Can figure out how to add the usefulness of 8624 into the registry.

Based on those qualifications,  we're going to adopt
draft-hoffman-dnssec-iana-cons in DNSOP.

Thanks

tim