Re: [DNSOP] "anything goes" (was Re: Should we try to work on DNS over HTTP in dnsop?)

[Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 08:13:42AM -0800, joel jaeggli wrote:
> I think we dramatically better off, if we are willing to critically
> consider the implications of proposals someplace and expose the record
> of that, and I don't have a better location on offer then here.

I completely agree.  But if we're going to do that, calling an
approach we don't like names adds nothing to the debate.  For
instance, I think there have been serious arguments against some
techniques, and I think those are useful contributions.  I'd be the
last person to say, "Don't criticise."  But such critiques need to
come with well-developed arguments.

In this case, for instance, one party suggested that there were
technical reasons not to use http(s) as a new encapsulation, and the
retort was (in effect) that someone's going to do this and hey,
anything goes so we must write it down.  That's not much of an
argument, and it's abusive of the efforts in the WG as well.  Hence my
objection.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[e-mail]