[DNSOP] On the call for adoption on Special Use Names (Please! Pretty please, with a cherry on top?!)

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Fri, 16 September 2016 21:54 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 5475A12B355 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Sep 2016 14:54:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.606
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.606 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, PLING_QUERY=0.994, 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 Vm-DC7JCqoNc for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Sep 2016 14:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x234.google.com (mail-qk0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::234]) (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 2C4D812B357 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Sep 2016 14:54:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x234.google.com with SMTP id w204so100126385qka.0 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Sep 2016 14:54:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=ZnM9CCvzbE/C9KoAYupVwRc3ODvC3oZc4Xh2uQa6FO8=; b=SNy6ZMbnEH575vsv40EZE67Hs+oSO9IbU6818rUpm2uh0tuo5AlcAXsPhGinZWHbVX nxuSult32tk9vZdM5FWR/+lqcr+HCTJOOuBEpL7YkKRTyLUrhQo82m49HaBtJJfBEURI Rb/fSu1gmPbNVLBemFb8cXIAWEQvw123qirb+qe10fOi/1SD4zqo4iIa0GFxzJrLoKPY pAPDjck3+IoowgbhtxZJhZXl3rhaupGgrjM5m9P4zwhoLsM37x3mXQePnhwLKUeRTKgS /53HFFjUtTfXR3oadtnqGXv0Ot3Jt2urbuPB+zNQmo+p3s1+a2sNsVvijXTL/YLLPCwN m1lQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=ZnM9CCvzbE/C9KoAYupVwRc3ODvC3oZc4Xh2uQa6FO8=; b=kGJL2+7Bkc7Nf7kCg1zumq2X3ii2p186f3SHA+EzRckPejWxjV9J96UjChDEx0cLY3 2DsPPbOSUa0fVG+FZMS02eHMq4hJf794bUqg0cfqhsilOqPJX7LXSLKvYY/tuB6uV5Yg fbiWxBKSts0u7snR6Nflxpn7BK8a5xQtwJ+CQib/iBGC+JOrOzdxV5lW3qLMKoRp8lKp csw8YY1eckiuri9mY8PSVXA1yATTePFlii9Ct9LldkboOjB/zex8nyl4OY8M6Dinc+4V bb2fWopnd4OGI3g1jfrk1/t67bM8faFYwAVTcSTkOzVuqJRuzb/IFQjeGdbA/Rl/QT3Z IGFQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwPtE2/AzlA+3uPAjjskQUdBouHQxoIhv+LcCgauej/Up8wyk1Asul2dpl/UAhY9AnAeaNpA3eRmJxveKdL6
X-Received: by 10.55.151.3 with SMTP id z3mr8758853qkd.321.1474062864192; Fri, 16 Sep 2016 14:54:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.55.147.196 with HTTP; Fri, 16 Sep 2016 14:53:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 17:53:53 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHw9_i+UVH78URWzk+4x=j9BZiKfX3C+UeFU9vz1OfZ3tPeN1Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/ZFPp-MTFmfYK9b-qGY3YaXmF920>
Subject: [DNSOP] On the call for adoption on Special Use Names (Please! Pretty please, with a cherry on top?!)
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, 16 Sep 2016 21:54:28 -0000

Hi all,

I know that everyone is sick to death of this whole topic -- we've
been talking about it for *years* with very little progress, and it is
filled with annoying policy and politics discussions....

However, if there is not sufficient review and feedback for the chairs
to be able to select between them (or some other clear outcome), we
will be stuck... and then we will continue to talk about this topic ad
nauseam[0].

So, just like ripping off a bandaid, let's choose a document, perhaps
make some minor edits, ship it and then perhaps we can get back to
some more interesting, technical work...

W
[0]: Personally I thing that time passed a while back, but...


-- 
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