On Jul 30, 2021, at 14:39, Joe Abley <jab...@hopcount.ca> wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > I think we've seen the working group drop particular proposed efforts for a > variety of reasons. I don't think it's accurate to characterize them all (or > any of them, to be honest) as victims to some special names obsession.
We had a discussion yesterday about how do just don’t have enough time. We had a survey about prioritization because we don’t have enough time. It is all about dnsop resources. I believe my characterization is accurate. That is independent of one of my drafts being nixed for lack of time in the WG. You can look back and see me critique the WG on time spent on Special Use domains going back several years. We never reach agreement, always conclude we are not the right group. We even vowed to stop talking about and and then reneged on that (although Suzan and I disagree on the history there) > Sometimes the working group just doesn't like particular ideas, and we move > on. That’s not what happened. When adopted people felt it was an experiment that could be done even if half the group felt there was no use for it. The document then simply was never moved further by the chairs. It would have been fine if during a WGLC people said this is a bad idea after all. But that is not what happened. What happened is that the WG instead took on .zz and then threw .alt in there and then we had another couple of face time meetings in these things that just never see consensus because the WG is very vocally split. > Harmful is in the eye of the beholder, perhaps. We literally had a survey to ask us “what should we kill because we don’t have enough time” and yet we keep talking about ISO and now Roy wants to keep talking about ISO after ISO said “don’t do that”. Yeah, it’s an objective harmful waste of time. Sorry if that sounds harsh. Paul _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
