Re: [dnsext] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ah-dnsext-rfc1995bis-ixfr-02

[Masataka Ohta <[e-mail]>]

Edward Lewis wrote:

>> You are saying DNS operators know nothing about the very basic
>> (thus, classical) points of database maintenance.
> 
> You have a vivid imagination.
> 
> What I am saying is that operators, other than me, have proposed 
> updating the tired old definition of IXFR based on what is see in 
> practice today.

Operators may find problems not properly handled by the current
protocol and may also propose a solution.

However, it does not mean that the problems are real nor that the
solution is the best one.

Thus, we are having an operational discussion, here.

> And I am agreeing that there is a reason to do so.

You may or may not join the discussion.

However, a purely imaginary example of yours with unrealistic
assumptions is merely harmful.

> Times 
> have changed and older definitions sometimes need to be brought up to 
> current standards.

Sure. If only there were convincing real world examples...

> In addition, you yourself said yesterday that parts of RFC 1995 were 
> left somewhat unfinished

No.

						Masataka Ohta