Thank you Wes, that is a helpful reference point. RFC 7720 is a useful anchor. My question was less about whether RSOs are expected to follow DNS development generally, and more about whether the v3 revision process has a defined mechanism for evaluating when IETF developments warrant updates to service expectations — particularly given the high bar for changes the work party has adopted. Looking at the two DNSOP sessions from IETF 124, a few developments seem to touch RFC 7720 territory directly — the IPv6 mandate draft, the DNSSEC algorithm rules discussions, and the post-quantum DNSSEC trajectory, which RFC 7720 does not currently address, at least to my reading. Best regards, Mohibul On Sat, Mar 14, 2026 at 11:03 PM Wes Hardaker <hardaker@isi.edu> wrote:
On that note, with IETF 125 currently underway in Shenzhen, I wanted to
raise a practical question: does the work party have a standing mechanism to track relevant DNSOP discussions that could introduce new BCPs applicable to root server operators? Given our mandate to align v3 expectations with current standards, it seems worth ensuring we have visibility into that work as it develops — even within our narrow scope.
Generally, it is expected that RSOs follow DNS development and specifications. The exact requirements of what MUST be followed, technically, are in RFC7720. -- Wes Hardaker USC/ISI