Mahesh Jethanandani has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-dnsop-04-00: Block
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-dnsop/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- BLOCK: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Much like Paul, I have a point that I would like a DISCUSSion around. This is not meant to be a BLOCK. "DNSOP", paragraph 0 > The DNSOP WG is also responsible for maintenance, updates, and extensions to > the DNS protocol. Thanks for the pointer to the email that describes the sentiment behind why the WG is undergoing a recharter. In that sentiment is the desire to split the WG to move some of the protocol work out to another WG while keeping the focus of this WG on operations. How does the above statement jive with that sentiment? What are the milestones that have to be achieved before the split can happen? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you did with these suggestions. Paragraph 0 > WG also provides guidance and elaborates best current practices for DNS dep > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ A determiner may be missing. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
