[nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter)
Jelte Jansen <jelte@isc.org> Wed, 15 September 2010 09:28 UTC
Return-Path: <jelte@isc.org>
X-Original-To: nscp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nscp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3C293A69AA for <nscp@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.056
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.056 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.232, BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y0WRPYOJE9td for <nscp@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:28:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.pao1.isc.org (mx.pao1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:0:2::2b]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 285F83A6910 for <nscp@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:28:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from farside.isc.org (farside.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:bb::5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "farside.isc.org", Issuer "ISC CA" (verified OK)) by mx.pao1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A13FC9423 for <nscp@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 09:28:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jelte@isc.org)
Received: from [192.168.8.11] (vhe-520087.sshn.net [195.169.221.157]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by farside.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0E45E6030 for <nscp@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 09:28:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jelte@isc.org)
Message-ID: <4C9091C8.1030702@isc.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 11:28:40 +0200
From: Jelte Jansen <jelte@isc.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.12) Gecko/20100826 Thunderbird/3.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: nscp@ietf.org
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter)
X-BeenThere: nscp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Nameserver control/configuration protocol discussion list <nscp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nscp>, <mailto:nscp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nscp>
List-Post: <mailto:nscp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nscp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nscp>, <mailto:nscp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 09:28:35 -0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 First of all: Welcome, and thank you for joining, or at least not immediately unsubscribing ;) As you may or may not remember, we had an informal meeting at IETF 78 in Maastricht, which I personally think went pretty well. I shall send out the notes from that meeting shortly. It has been a while since then, and I had hoped to get this list up before the BoF Request had to be submitted, so we could discuss a charter to propose, which is needed for a BoF request. However, getting the list to be set up took a bit more time than expected (nearly 6 weeks, to be exact), and the deadline for requesting BoF meetings at IETF 79 has passed by now. Therefore, Stephen and I have written a proposed draft charter, which I sent in with the BoF request. I'll add it below this message, and comments or suggestions are very welcome. We do still have some time left before the next IETF, so I trust we can get consensus on what it is we're trying to achieve here. Jelte NSCP (draft) Charter - -------------------- Objective - --------- Specify an interoperable mechanism to monitor, control and configure common functionality of DNS nameservers. Problem statement - ----------------- The problem statement that this working group seeks to address can be summarised as follows: Management of name servers for the Domain Name System (DNS) [RFC1034] [RFC1035] has traditionally been done using vendor-specific monitoring, configuration and control methods. Although some service monitoring platforms can test the functionality of the DNS itself there is not an interoperable way to manage (monitor, control and configure) the internal aspects of a name server itself. Previous standardization work within the IETF resulted in the creation of two SNMP MIB modules [RFC1611] [RFC1612] but they failed to achieve significant implementation and deployment. The perceived reasons behind the failure for the two MIB modules are further documented in [RFC3197]. (From draft-ietf-dnsop-name-server-management-reqs-04) Despite the failure to achieve acceptance of an SNMP-based solution, there is a perceived need for an interoperable way to manage nameservers, something that led to the aforementioned draft being written to document the requirements. Although this draft was written under the auspices of the DNSOP working group, work to develop a solution is outside its charter. The NSCP working group will develop a protocol to fulfill these requirements. The aims of the group will be to: 1. Review work to date (such as draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-control-00, which proposes a solution based on Netconf and Yang) and the available technologies and choose a suitable technology on which to base future work. 2. Produce document(s) specifying a name server control protocol that address the requirements of interoperable management of nameservers. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkyQkcgACgkQ4nZCKsdOncXo6wCdFjnh0k14Eb0hTk7XPsa2prZX KQYAoKzU922IvJKh0Y+EnDMtTZgZojPP =TfPT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter) Jelte Jansen
- Re: [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter) Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter) jad
- Re: [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter) Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter) jad
- Re: [nscp] Welcome (and proposed charter) Jeffrey Hutzelman
- [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or not? (… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Lars-Johan Liman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Lars-Johan Liman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Ondřej Surý
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Jeffrey Hutzelman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Jeffrey Hutzelman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Ondřej Surý
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Tony Finch
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Edward Lewis
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Wes Hardaker
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Tony Finch
- [nscp] Proposed wording for the charter Paul Hoffman
- Re: [nscp] Updating zone *content* in-scope or no… Jeffrey Hutzelman