IETF Last Call Review of draft-hardaker-dns-wgs-at-ietf-06
review-hardaker-dns-wgs-at-ietf-06-intdir-lc-lou-2026-04-26-00

Document: draft-hardaker-dns-wgs-at-ietf
Title: Community considerations on DNS WG structures at IETF
Reviewer: David Lou
Review result: Ready with Nits

This is an IETF process document, not a technical document. So the comments
here are more focused on the text itself.

Major issues:
None

Minor issues:
It could be my personal opinion instead of a minor issue. But I put it here
anyway for discussion/consideration. In the "Recommendations" chapter, it is
recommended to create 3 new WGs, where I wonder whether it is really necessary
to create a DNSDISPATCH WG, for the following reasons: - The Findings in
chapter 2 shows the community has consensus on create 2 WGs instead of 3.
Regarding the dispatch work, it states that "A separated DNSDISPATCH mechanism
would be beneficial...". - The text gives audiences the impression that a new
WG is not really required. For instance, "this WG should conduct its work
almost entirely over a mailing list...", "Ideally, in-person meetings should be
rare.", "A significant portion of submissions to DNSDISPTACH can likely be
handled quickly and efficiently". - In each Area, there is already a WG (e.g.
the INTAREA WG) acting primarily as a forum for discussing a wide spectrum of
topics that affect the entire area, and taking partially the responsibility to
"dispatch" a topic to the right WG in case of ambiguity. - On top of that,
there is a DNS Directorate in the Ops Area, which can help dispatch DNS-related
topics as well.

Some nits:
1. P2, Table of Contents, "1.2 Requirements language" -> "1.2 Requirements
Language"; "Orginal project announcement" - > "Orginal Project Announcement" 2.
P3, "The team uses a few new WG names below, but recognize both... " -> "but
recognizes both... " 3. P4, "used to stress importance of some recommendations"
-> "used to stress the importance of some recommendations" 4. P6, "each WG will
need to make their own decision on this matter" -> "to make its own decision on
this matter" 5. P7, "submissions to DNSDISPTACH can likely" -> "submissions to
DNSDISPATCH can likely" 6. P9, "WG chairs, AD, ISE, etc" -> "WG chairs, AD,
ISE, etc.,"