Subject: [dnsext] On 2929bis procedures and current expert reviews

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 12:14:43 -0400

Dear colleagues,

Some off-list questions have encouraged me to try to clarify exactly
what's going on with RRTYPE requests.  I hope this note will help
make things plainer.

The 2929bis draft, which was supposed to be published shortly after
the Dublin meeting, is still pending.  But we've been assured several
times that this is an administrative delay.  Accordingly, IANA (who
have more than one open request for RRTPYE assignment) have asked us
to proceed under the terms of that draft.  (Speaking only personally, I
think this is a good thing, because we've heard repeatedly that it's
very hard to get an RRTYPE assigned, and I think it would be good to
show the extent to which that is true or false.)

The IESG appointed a pool of experts for these reviews.  In
alphabetical order, they are Roy Arends ([email-masked]) and
Frederico Neves ([email-masked]).  In addition, I serve as the
chair of the pool of experts.  This pool approach is in keeping with
section 3.2 of RFC 5226.

At the moment, what happens is IANA sends requests to me as the "lead
expert", and leaves it to me to farm it to the pool accordingly.
So far, this hasn't been terribly smooth, but the plan has been for
the three of us to come to some kind of consensus and address the
expert review procedures that way.

It may be argued that 2929bis refers to a single expert, and not a
pool, and that our plan is therefore inappropriate under the current
terms of the draft.  If anyone feels strongly about this one way or
the other, I'd appreciate feedback before we actually process our
first request.  We could as easily designate one of the pool to be the
expert for a given request.

Please note that we currently have two requests open.  The first is
for the RRTYPE "ASSET".  I thought I sent the template for WG review
on 28 August, but I somehow missed that it wasn't posted.  So I
re-posted it on 11 Sept.  That posting is at
http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/namedroppers.2008/msg01804.html.  

The second request is for the RRTYPE "NEGATIVE", to be used by mDNS.  I
posted that template on 10 Sept.  The posting is at
http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/namedroppers.2008/msg01792.html.  

I hope this clears things up.  If not, please feel free to ask
anything you like about this procedure.

Best regards,

Andrew
-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]
+1 503 667 4564 x104
http://www.commandprompt.com/

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>