Re: [DNSOP] call for adoption: draft-vandergaast-dnsop-edns-client-subnet

On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Mark Delany <f4t@november.emu.st> wrote:
> On 15Feb15, Paul Hoffman allegedly wrote:
>> <secretary hat on>
>>
>> On Feb 15, 2015, at 4:49 AM, Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > The WG adopted this document some time ago (the announcement to the list is dated Nov. 14, 2014).
>>
>> Yep, and the authors turned in an WG-named draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet-00
>> > It now needs reviewers to review and authors to revise.
>> > If you agreed to review it earlier, or even if you didn't but you're interested, please do.
>>
>> FWIW, according to <https://svn.tools.ietf.org/svn/wg/dnsop/doclist.html>, four people (including me) agreed to review. It probably needs more.
>
> And I might add that at least some of us (even though not named in
> that list) did post review comments after the call and we've yet to
> hear from the authors on some of the issues raised. That was my point
> in prodding a day or so ago.

Apologies - the authors had all forgotten which one us was holding the
pen, and were all wondering why others were not responding /
incorporating comments.
I've just gone hunting under my desk and have found an old, leaky biro
that looks like it still has sufficient ink.

I'll now go back and try incorporate all the comments, etc. Expect to
see a flurry of updates.
This document lives in GitHub, I'm hoping to incorporate comments and
then commit often, so folk can follow along at home...

W

>
>
> Mark.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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