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

Benno Overeinder <benno@NLnetLabs.nl> Thu, 07 July 2022 19:13 UTC

Return-Path: <benno@NLnetLabs.nl>
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 9F43CC157B34; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 12:13:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nlnetlabs.nl
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qqfC1fUVONxB; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 12:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outbound.soverin.net (outbound.soverin.net [IPv6:2a10:de80:1:4091:b9e9:2215:0:1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 529CFC14CF00; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 12:12:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.soverin.net (c04smtp-lb01.int.sover.in [10.10.4.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by outbound.soverin.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Lf5dq3dp5zJV; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 19:12:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.soverin.net (smtp.soverin.net [10.10.4.100]) by soverin.net
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nlnetlabs.nl; s=soverin; t=1657221167; bh=l+LW96D02WB0rm592Yvp9hvwo1VwVNBjk7IFa0Kax3E=; h=Date:To:References:From:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=UunuKwVIhH7uErNx4mlvK9nQo8spBHLw1IXjcPGoQcoMA2yoa8C+38g3iRZ2uUswp qaLJyEt9uGd/PMEWEPrYCw/qyutp/51lIAPpfoIvZLllPvgDNN0JvtVN+I2lwfR6i2 uui7XZY3gj59IVGFiLnKC0WtBcVi8rIRkyWEhQExYN+eKGvB2bapmqB6+pmO9s/PSJ JVuw1xj3Z4YJB+MII2i0sZJJYlHUzS4oZO6Ei7cJ8tCudN2H5MkDPQoLZQQhAMM/7E nYvQwL1RHq58dFyuX+cgaXr2kHfbGq26zlY8Wk34buy04jMg4UJJeuVsNJq/7q2VT2 ckutMOgbu0P+A==
Message-ID: <4746ec15-b459-21eb-1908-01b45d2e3940@NLnetLabs.nl>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2022 21:12:44 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Language: en-GB
To: DNSOP Working Group <dnsop@ietf.org>
References: <CADyWQ+FGSdnW8NbBT72vGzNL9Bdr5DrM357K4X+iAkhS+aZs0A@mail.gmail.com> <3b8026db-74a6-ff96-8329-07a16087c46d@NLnetLabs.nl> <86C99A90-E74D-4E76-9A56-D7EB5EB54093@icann.org> <15bbb88a-017a-bde9-7622-5996e2335e9e@NLnetLabs.nl> <e702dda0-4395-7555-8678-d513c9bcfef8@nthpermutation.com> <96262aca-32ce-322e-bba0-389e0dd15c7f@NLnetLabs.nl> <91fc4e2d-32be-2d7c-a9a0-b25d3286ff9a@nthpermutation.com>
From: Benno Overeinder <benno@NLnetLabs.nl>
Cc: DNSOP Chairs <dnsop-chairs@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <91fc4e2d-32be-2d7c-a9a0-b25d3286ff9a@nthpermutation.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/h57yLT-GJTbRquJKPdUCineZ4pc>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Ext] DNSOP Document Adoption Poll (June 2022)
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 07 Jul 2022 19:13:01 -0000

Hi Mike,

On 07/07/2022 20:26, Michael StJohns wrote:
> On 7/7/2022 12:28 PM, Benno Overeinder wrote:
>> Conducting a survey (2 times now) has worked well over the past 1.5 
>> years to prioritise finishing existing work and starting new work. Two 
>> years ago we (as a WG) discussed how to manage the workload of the WG 
>> and running a poll seemed to be one of the mechanisms to help with that.
> 
> Using the search terms "poll" and "survey" individually via the DNSOP 
> archive web page, I found the last July email 
> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/bXDwmPhft5BXFndKs5xI3FjOewE/) 
> which was about prioritization and a bunch of doodle polls about interim 
> WG scheduling.  I didn't find any about new work.  For the 
> prioritization google thing, I can't actually read the text of the 
> google doc via that link, and I'm not sure what to search for in the 
> mail archive to find the resultant document if indeed it was published 
> to the list.  Searching the archives is *very* clumsy. So, depending 
> only on my memory, I seem to remember that other poll was only about 
> dealing with accepted work that hadn't progressed (i.e., kill or 
> keep).   Scanning forward from the publication date of that poll, I 
> can't see anyplace where the result of that poll was actually published 
> to the list.  The chair's meeting notes of 6 Aug 2021, 20 Aug 2021 and 3 
> Sept 2021 don't reference the poll.  The 19 Nov 2021 notes indicate that 
> another poll was being considered for work prioritization, but I can't 
> find where it was sent, if at all.
> 
> So, could you send me the link to the DNSOP emails where the results of 
> the previous two surveys were published please?  And for that matter 
> where the second prioritization poll was sent out.

You are correct, we did have one survey/poll.  In my memory they were 
two different surveys, but it was one survey for prioritising existing 
work and open questions about adopting new work.  The results were 
presented in the DNSOP WG chairs slides of the IETF 112 meeting.  The 
new work suggested by the WG was dnssec-bootstrapping and dnssec-automation.

As the notes indicate, we considered starting a poll but ended up not 
doing so for IETF 113.  Thanks for correcting.


Regards,

-- Benno