As this document’s shepherd, FWIW I think that if the document does
proceed in the WG it needs significant love and attention. The document
in its current state is not well written and it would require
significant labor to resolve its numerous grammar and linguistic issues.
It’s also very long and if the authors want to continue with it they
should consider shortening it or breaking it up into multiple more
targetted drafts.
My $0.02.
-Andrew
On 30 May 2023, at 0:58, Tim Wicinski wrote:
All,
The chairs want to thank everyone for the feedback on this document
recently. We've been in discussions with Warren and the authors about
this
document, and we have some questions we'd like the working group to
help us
resolve.
While this work was relevant when it was first written and adopted, we
feel
that over time the DNSSEC landscape has changed and this document may
not
be as relevant as it once was.
Questions to consider:
Should this draft be removed from the WG?
Are there fundamental issues that need to be addressed in this
document?
Are there items in the document that should be moved to another
document?
The chairs are currently considering abandoning this document in its
current state. We'd like to hear from others on this.
We're going to let comments run for two weeks, and wrap up June 12,
2023.
Thanks
tim
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
