[nscp] BoF request denied

Jelte Jansen <jelte@isc.org> Wed, 22 September 2010 18:35 UTC

Return-Path: <jelte@isc.org>
X-Original-To: nscp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nscp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4813F3A6AA8 for <nscp@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:35:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.552
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.552 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.048, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XPwaOwhnlqn7 for <nscp@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpout1.ru.nl (smtpout1.ru.nl []) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CFC03A694D for <nscp@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:33:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS & ClamAV
Received: from tjeb.nl (vhe-520087.sshn.net []) by smtp.ru.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AFAD16E6A6 for <nscp@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 20:33:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [] (unknown []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by tjeb.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CB4CECFA03 for <nscp@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 20:33:18 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4C9A4BE9.50105@isc.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:33:13 -0700
From: Jelte Jansen <jelte@isc.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100915 Thunderbird/3.0.8
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] BoF request denied
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, 22 Sep 2010 18:35:52 -0000

Hash: SHA1


the IESG/IAB have discussed the BoF request, and have decided that a BoF is 'not
needed'. To quote the message I got:

 "The IAB/IESG solidly supports the development of a YANG model for DNS
  configuration and would like the work to begin immediately.
  After some discussion, we decided that the DNSOPS should develop the YANG
  module. This supports an precedent established with SNMP MIBS (each WG is
  responsible to develop its own MIBs/YANG modules)."

I am talking to the dnsop chairs about this, and we are trying to figure out
what to do now. It is at this point unclear whether this is a question of 'mgmt
systems MUST use YANG', and we are waiting for an answer on this.

If this work is accepted by dnsop (this time...), it does mean a recharter
there, and it means that discussion on nscp should happen on their list.

However, for now, I think we should keep discussing scope (and technology, if
anyone has any input on that), here. If we have to move later, I'll try to find
a way to make the transfer as painless as possible.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/