IETF Logo Mail Archive

[DNSOP] Re: draft-ietf-dnsop-reflectors-are-evil-05.txt

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Thu, 13 December 2007 13:51 UTC

Return-path: <dnsop-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J2oTO-0002Vl-28; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:51:34 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J2oTN-0002Vg-2N for dnsop@ietf.org; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:51:33 -0500
Received: from mx2.nic.fr ([192.134.4.11]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J2oTI-0002dH-Gt for dnsop@ietf.org; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:51:33 -0500
Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id B3EE91C0197; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:51:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF3D31C0195; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:51:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACA7A58ECCA; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:51:27 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:51:27 +0100
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Peter Koch <pk@DENIC.DE>
Message-ID: <20071213135127.GA27469@nic.fr>
References: <a0624080fc37ba787c4f6@[130.129.67.81]> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0712100857150.18281-100000@citation2.av8.net> <20071210153238.GA435@dul1mcmlarson-l1.verisignlabs.com> <a06240802c385c7068f80@[192.168.1.101]> <A1107A3F-DF06-4A69-B83D-A0ECE38FB672@ca.afilias.info> <20071212184210.GK11923@denics7.denic.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20071212184210.GK11923@denics7.denic.de>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0
X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-5-686 i686
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----)
X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8
Cc: IETF DNSOP WG <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: [DNSOP] Re: draft-ietf-dnsop-reflectors-are-evil-05.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/dnsop>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dnsop-bounces@ietf.org

On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 07:42:10PM +0100,
 Peter Koch <pk@DENIC.DE> wrote 
 a message of 30 lines which said:

> The editors have submitted -05 as an attempt to cover the discussing
> ADs' concerns and we are - together with our AD - continuing work to
> get the DISCUSSes cleared.

The problem is that some are quite bogus. For instance,
https://datatracker.ietf.org/idtracker/draft-ietf-dnsop-reflectors-are-evil/comment/72422/
describes in detail why someone might not trust his ISP's resolver
(something quite obvious and with which we all agree) and then jumps
directly to say that the only solution is to allow ORNS, ignoring the
other solutions mentioned in the draft.

Is it really necessary to "address" such not-well-thought-out
comments?




_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email