IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] Small review of draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet-00

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Wed, 01 April 2015 15:00 UTC

Return-Path: <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2A541ACD5A for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 08:00:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.56
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.56 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 GxBpPWhJDF49 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 08:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26CE71A8A82 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 08:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id E6C95280385; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 17:00:10 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1AC72802BD; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 17:00:10 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (unknown [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:7::86:133]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4419B38038; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 16:59:40 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 16:59:40 +0200
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org>
Message-ID: <20150401145940.GA21771@nic.fr>
References: <20150401143429.GB16676@nic.fr> <D1417DD4.A843%edward.lewis@icann.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <D1417DD4.A843%edward.lewis@icann.org>
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 8.0
X-Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-4-686-pae i686
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
Organization: NIC France
X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/sE9fvTHHXIxN-epHuigtW4V2zF0>
Cc: "dnsop@ietf.org" <dnsop@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] Small review of draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-client-subnet-00
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 15:00:14 -0000

On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 02:53:41PM +0000,
 Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org> wrote 
 a message of 127 lines which said:

> The draft isn't justifying the existence or use of centralized
> resolvers, just establishing they exist.  Digressing into such a
> discussion would be a distraction.

I disagree. The draft is not neutral, it lists the pros of the
centralized resolvers but not the cons.

For me, it is not ready to be published.

v2.37.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status