Re: [DNSOP] [Doh] Proposal for a side-meeting on services centralization at IETF 104 Prague

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Mon, 11 March 2019 17:13 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
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 04EB9131148; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 10:13:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 cGCUXXqqZX98; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 10:13:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4223A131104; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 10:13:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id B8F74280151; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 18:13:38 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id B1987280285; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 18:13:38 +0100 (CET)
Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (relay01.prive.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:15::11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9DCB280151; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 18:13:38 +0100 (CET)
Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.users.prive.nic.fr [10.10.86.133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3F2A663E080; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 18:13:38 +0100 (CET)
Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9CE714023A; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 18:13:38 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 18:13:38 +0100
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>, DoH WG <doh@ietf.org>, dns-privacy@ietf.org, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, hrpc@irtf.org
Message-ID: <20190311171338.kusmt6q2z7mx6dww@nic.fr>
References: <20190311165813.ilrz5ocxomraavbq@nic.fr> <CA+9kkMDawXJdC4fPihRbL0Ov6Fo4kUmp=RQMRiNzDLnyPLJGow@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+9kkMDawXJdC4fPihRbL0Ov6Fo4kUmp=RQMRiNzDLnyPLJGow@mail.gmail.com>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.8
X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-8-amd64 x86_64
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000001, version=1.2.2
X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2019.3.11.170316
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/pmWliiNTO3NQNwfDH8r-73Jntv8>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [Doh] Proposal for a side-meeting on services centralization at IETF 104 Prague
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: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 17:13:42 -0000

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 10:06:21AM -0700,
 Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> wrote 
 a message of 76 lines which said:

> This conflicts with SECDISPATCH, which will have a pretty serious impact on
> who might attend.  Scheduling these things is very hard, obviously. Given
> this topic, you may have to move outside the normal agenda time to get a
> reasonable shot at avoiding conflict.

I avoided conflicts with doh, dprive, dnsop and hrpc but avoiding all
conflicts is close-to-impossible. In the evening, people have
meetings, too.

I admit I'm not sure that Secdispatch is so important here. The
subject of the side meeting is not security-specific.