Re: [DNSOP] comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-03

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Thu, 16 July 2015 00:34 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DFA41B2B4E for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 17:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0dOvQGW320Yy for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 17:34:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.yitter.info (mx2.yitter.info [50.116.54.116]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D13D21B2B4A for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 17:34:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24C1210012 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:34:04 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca
Received: from mx2.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx2.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1YhyFSHFDiTf for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:34:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mx2.yitter.info (unknown [207.164.2.188]) by mx2.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 89C881000B for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:34:01 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 20:33:59 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: dnsop@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20150716003359.GD13926@mx2.yitter.info>
References: <CAEKtLiQWPM6yJZZASQ5k1bzsbHc3jv5FRsJ6ifgUdj9TRLCmRg@mail.gmail.com> <83A64168-3510-4E0B-AA23-54547C05990B@vpnc.org> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1507141719130.32296@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk> <55A543CD.6010008@gmail.com> <CAEKtLiRQVgQRnm51gSb0e9zhmQ7vYVJXdPBQsSLXqHo_hiAKyw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAEKtLiRQVgQRnm51gSb0e9zhmQ7vYVJXdPBQsSLXqHo_hiAKyw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/AS83EPs_OrSGgP1xg1gzYKYJuhM>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] comments on draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-terminology-03
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 00:34:06 -0000

Hi,

On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 03:43:12PM -0400, Casey Deccio wrote:
> I am also concerned about the apparent urgency to get the initial document
> out with points that admittedly remain contentious and/or where there isn't
> WG consensus.  I don't think it needs perfection, but it seems unnecessary
> to get the document published without further explicitly identifying and
> considering the standing issues.  We've haven't had this document
> before--I'm not sure what the rush is now.

Just on this issue, and speaking only for myself (but as one of the
people behind this document), my view is that this WG has historically
been one of the places where documents go to die, and I am unwilling
to go through the exercise of proving again how great an enemy of the
good the perfect can be.  I'd be much more inclined to remove the
contentious definitions and publish that document than to try to get
things perfect.

I agree and acknowledge that there remain some definitions in there
that are contentious.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com