Where we stand and where we are going

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

Hi.

Well, as usual, we have an IETF coming up, the publication
deadline is very near, I haven't accomplished as much as I would
like, and most others appear to not be publishing quickly either.
I am working on getting another version of "dns-search" out
before next Monday's deadline.  While it contains a number of
clarifications and updates, the important material is in several
new (or almost-new) sections.  I will circulate those to this
group as they are ready, in the hope of getting comments before I
fold them into the document or, at least, of giving the rest of
you some time to think about them before Yokohama.

I have realized as I have been working on it that it presents an
abstract model, but perhaps too many undefined choices.  Would it
be helpful to have drafts that identify and specify implementable
protocols (even if they are wrong) as a means of getting comments
and moving forward?  If so, we need to figure out how to get
those written -- I can certainly produce some text for people to
revise and replace, but that may not be the most efficient way to
move forward.

Several people have asked about a BOF (or even a WG) in Yokohama.
The problem, unfortunately, remains what it was in Minneapolis:
especially for a WG, I don't think we have quite enough material
on the table to ask the IESG to set one up: the only relevant
draft I've seen since Minneapolis has been the Chinese name
string proposal.  As most of you know, I would like to have
enough substantive material ready before we try for general
meetings to avoid one of the problems that has hindered the work
of the IDN WG: too many people talking about too many different
topics and not really understanding that they are not
communicating with each other.

Suggestions as to how to proceed, comments on drafts, etc., are,
of  course, welcome at any time.

regards,
    john