Re: [weirds] Outcomes of today's meeting

Murray,
all,

I felt in the room a strong push back to the *concrete* DNS bootstrapping solution as described in
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-blanchet-weirds-bootstrap-00
, which I do not find in your summary.

FWIW: I also personally find this bootstrapping implementation A Bad Idea. And for clarification: I am not against DNS bootstrapping in general.

Best,
Marcos

weirds-bounces@ietf.org wrote on 01/08/2013 12:25:11:

> Von: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
> An: "weirds@ietf.org" <weirds@ietf.org>,
> Datum: 01/08/2013 12:28
> Betreff: [weirds] Outcomes of today's meeting
> Gesendet von: weirds-bounces@ietf.org
>
> Colleagues,

> It's my understanding that our paths forward are as follows, based
> on today's meeting:

> Search:
> 1) We will roll a rudimentary search capability into the rdap-query
> document, and repeat Working Group Last Call focusing on the new
> material once it's added.  I have changed its state in the tracker
> back to "WG Document", and set a new milestone of November.  That
> means a second WGLC will start in early to mid October.  Please let
> me know if you think that's too aggressive or not aggressive enough.

> 2) The working group can decide on a specific syntax on the mailing
> list.  It didn't make sense to dedicate precious microphone time to
> discussing that this morning, especially since the two proposed
> syntaxes on the summary slide are so similar.  This seems like a
> coin flip to me, but the working group can decide however it wishes.

> 3) The working group will need to explore which fields will be
> searchable, and which capabilities (ordering, paging) need to be
> supported.  This will be predicated on what current registries are
> doing, or what things registries are pledging to implement.  It
> sounds like Scott did some of that research already to get us
> started; the group should continue to explore this and come up with
> a proposed set of capabilities.

> 4) We will not work on advanced search, or adopt a separate document
> for basic search, at this point.

> 5) Basic search will be specified, but will not be required to implement.
>
> 6) We need internationalization clue here.  I'll see if I can secure some.

> 7) The results of the search work will impact the JSON response document.

> Object Inventory:
> 1) This is now an official milestone.  I've set it for October of
> this year, meaning WGLC around late September.  Again, please let me
> know if this needs to be changed in either direction.  I will act as
> document shepherd.  The group should review the document and send
> comments to the mailing list so we can get it ready for a Working
> Group Last Call; I expect this will be pretty painless.

> Redirects:
> 1) We have more work to do in this area, especially since it's tied
> to bootstrapping.  This remains an active WG item.  I've set a
> milestone of November on this one as well, but it can be adjusted.

> Bootstrapping:
> 1) This one appears to need the most R&D by the working group.
> Fortunately, a lot of good discussion occurred at the mic today.  We
> will ensure this issue, and redirection, get ample time at the
> microphone in Vancouver.
>
> 2) There is no single WG document for this yet; two are proposed for
> adoption now, and some hybrid model was also proposed in the meeting
> today.  When that third draft appears, we can do a (probably
> extended) call for adoption in order to choose a path forward.

> 3) I will create a milestone for this.  I presume Pete will approve
> it given its obvious necessity and the attention it's getting, but
> he might surprise me.  :-)

> Please let me know if I got any of this wrong, or if any of the
> actions or dates need adjustment.

> -MSK, WEIRDS co-chair
> _______________________________________________
> weirds mailing list
> weirds@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/weirds