Skip to main content

Minutes interim-2024-dnsop-01: Tue 17:00
minutes-interim-2024-dnsop-01-202401301700-00

Meeting Minutes Domain Name System Operations (dnsop) WG
Date and time 2024-01-30 17:00
Title Minutes interim-2024-dnsop-01: Tue 17:00
State Active
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2024-01-30

minutes-interim-2024-dnsop-01-202401301700-00
DNSOP WG
Interim meeting 2024-01-30 1700 UTC
Chairs: Benno Overeinder, Suzanne Woolf, Tim Wicinski
Minutes taken by Paul Hoffman
Only stuff said that happened at the mic is reported here
Agenda: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-interim-2024-dnsop
Materials: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2024-dnsop-01/session/dnsop

Intro from the chairs
	This interim is for bootstrapping the topic before IETF119

Presentation on state of DELEG draft, Ralf Weber
	https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dnsop-deleg/

Legacy resolver compliance testing results, Roy Arends

Open discussion points in the draft
	Viktor Dukovni: Didn't see Microsoft's resolver tested; very different in origin
		Found the draft more confusing than illuminating
		Examples are haphazard
		Wants reorganization
		Wants a motivations document; what problem are we solving
	Roy: Maybe split the document into different topics
		This document is core
		Another document can have all the offerings
		Another document that gives an introduction to the whole thing
		This is a -00
	Ralf: Wanted to get it ready for the interim
		OK with splitting out motivations into a different draft
	Suzanne: this discussion is not about specifics in the draft

Initial reflections on DELEG, Paul Wouters

Open discussion: discussion and reflection on interim
	Suzanne: Process discussion not today
	Ralf: PaulW's proposal #1 didn't want to do this to prolong DELEG
		Can happen in parallel
		There are plenty of implementations that don't share names
	Viktor:
		The idea of having more records at the parent needs motivation, but seems mostly harmless
		Putting more records puts more pressure on resolvers under attack
	Warren Kumari: Process-related
		BoF request was for extensions
		IESG doesn't feel that you can have a BoF for something that doesn't exist
		Wants the BoF to be about DELEG itself
			No assumption that people have been at interim
			Maybe a WG-forming BoF
			Need to be careful that DNSOPs folks participate
			Thus, in OPS
			Scheduled right after DNSOP so that there is overlap
	Roy: Will talk with Warren about the BoF request
	Viktor: Make the draft shorter and clearer
	Benno: Keep contributing to the DNSOP mailing list, specific text can go into the repo
	Peter Thomassen: Where to discuss this?
		Benno: On the mailing list
		Suzanne: This helps identify new work that might be spun off
		Benno: Protocol discussion on the mailing list
	Ralf: People coming early to DNS-OARC next week, there is an informal room on Wednesday