Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call [draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse]

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Fri, 07 October 2016 23:19 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEBF1129495 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 16:19:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 EpbCqB-etao3 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 16:19:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22f.google.com (mail-qk0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E1A0129486 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 16:18:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id o68so55744945qkf.3 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 16:18:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=5bb8ufobRqUSDwbIQAWqgMdBO0wnNrP6G1qVlWM0XSg=; b=tKLhf9Hgp/Otn/UX+0NqhUcYMRstCf3fqcOpnj8IaL7Ebu9bctsYPWi+ohm/s8VN4y IpYWGHi3jklt5JlJ7phtqmzmNSmCDIHgbYi97Zau9LctJXBke3ryuqgzA2vk8MW/HQ6D MCXFtnlYfJIWc+ttZ/UITW62aa3EeqBWeDhvqCJyos16VxqOdMoozLgEHoqq6mhg5g8G c6YnsEEbieXGNs5pu5iu+8fnCPXXIpiKNstPknnSc0L7lfhU7F2UvDrxKxylbU9IBzD2 etf/jPtGI/xfifmFIuDWtgIhl4c4M1sVO8JJ+DdqSkt4GCsqp/Xf9c4qkNiEsyYk0kwY NnLw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=5bb8ufobRqUSDwbIQAWqgMdBO0wnNrP6G1qVlWM0XSg=; b=CqSVyEEW0xeZUUq5DTioxn1g165uUWIY2W33dlMRHpgbYq4zpPR3BQfsw4XWx6ngZk 70pfarS4cRcuLT5fxlBx02bWhmQay+r37L11XckJchjmGbJpP0qZn1yyKJUBzjLKh3mB xxm+sh2BKLN5XTp+XXk7el/kto8bNv4oNJ6xMX1ypvM3vtuWQpuVdeE7bktBexeP5I7L /cKgw+oyktenhUK5EdGvkse5fhusOi/DkMWMdM+A8IpqdQRcqjpUil6Qfx6IWc9rb/JS Xi3ssDOUcT7aYVhaAlaBfxrA1fpOH2yZU/+5UTsdelcbN4+qqkAwQbh6OgeBNrT9LDD4 ceUw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RkM8CVKGgKfH+Gz4NorITP0b6O2600KJdWAdYFIZjzFOZDZ8Ju39zs9S6kScjrBKN/+8pzhK78mTUN9tK3x
X-Received: by 10.55.22.140 with SMTP id 12mr20851804qkw.236.1475882336312; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 16:18:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.55.147.196 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 16:18:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_i+k_-Vz9K6nM7XNrR+hvPbGyB-7KfJsZjqVNLzVjXdmCQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHw9_iJrgF3w-=0e8XbBLbDNPN9Nyuw15WS7AcZO5LbzBLKR8A@mail.gmail.com> <20161004192237.15135.qmail@ary.lan> <CA+nkc8CNx9-ROWkV8gs5N5+Pjw1NJb8qQ3DPXAxDUC5+mJv-=w@mail.gmail.com> <20161006163735.GA18000@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <alpine.OSX.2.11.1610061248310.47126@ary.qy> <20161006195816.GA20784@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <3a75080b-b14b-ebad-777f-58014730058a@gmail.com> <CAHw9_i+k_-Vz9K6nM7XNrR+hvPbGyB-7KfJsZjqVNLzVjXdmCQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 19:18:25 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iJiXBYpFtPa3VOZC0AJqcuepEZZPN8W+pNivtVDY_=9Hg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/DOemMUyLpG3sQsJlJ3LtTIpywtg>
Cc: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Working Group Last Call [draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse]
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Fri, 07 Oct 2016 23:19:14 -0000

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
> Okey dokey, everyone!
>
> I will be attempting to re-add, and better explain the "positive" answers bit.
> I really appreciate all of the feedback which we have received - I'm
> juggling a few plates at the moment, and so am somewhat distracted,
> but I'll try integrate them fully and in order.
>
> This will likely require some assistance / patience from the WG to
> make sure that I've worded things cleanly / clearly.

Ok everyone -- I have put back the "positive text", and have reworded
a bunch of surrounding stuff to try and make it more clear.
Unfortunately while doing this I have moved so much around that I am
having a hard time making sure that I have correctly integrated /
addressed everyones comments. The new "wildcard" text also seems
suspiciously short, but I'm having a hard time writing better text.

Basically at this point I've spent so much time staring at the same
bits of text (and shuffling it around) that my brain is dribbling out
my ears.

Please have a look and let me know if it is OK, and if not, please
suggest some text. If I've missed your comments, or somehow messed
them up, I'm truly sorry, please let me know (preferably by providing
text or using baby words!) and I'll try address them.

I was initially just going to submit to Github and ask for review
there, but reordering the sections made enough of a change (and I want
wider review) that I figured I should just publish -04.

Thank you all,
W


>
> W
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 9:47 PM, Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/6/16 3:58 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 01:47:28PM -0400,
>>>  John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote
>>>  a message of 34 lines which said:
>>>
>>>> It still seems to me that the time to add the wildcards back in
>>>> would be less than the time to do two separate documents.  Unless
>>>> there's some reason that this needs to be published in a hurry,
>>>
>>>
>>> Not for me, I'm fine with a delay (there have been many important
>>> changes between -02 and -03, during the WGLC, so, some time to digest
>>> and study them may be worth it).
>>>
>>
>> I agree. There is no need to hurry this along. I'd rather get this right.
>>
>> tim
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> DNSOP mailing list
>> DNSOP@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>
>
>
> --
> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
> idea in the first place.
> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
> of pants.
>    ---maf



-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf