IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mif] Server selection document is "band-aid" not solution

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Fri, 18 November 2011 02:13 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6485D1F0C4D for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 18:13:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.568
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.568 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.031, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EzzjzLg7Eri6 for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 18:13:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod7og103.obsmtp.com (exprod7og103.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.159]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B7DC1F0C34 for <mif@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 18:13:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob103.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTsW/QSuZS4PmsUP+2pGCmo8wfSdNqxvY@postini.com; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 18:13:34 PST
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91E091B82AD for <mif@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 18:13:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E2EE19005D; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 18:13:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.131]) with mapi id 14.01.0339.001; Thu, 17 Nov 2011 18:13:19 -0800
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Thread-Topic: [mif] Server selection document is "band-aid" not solution
Thread-Index: AQHMpM8ZeOJMqkjpCkunz3mHScTfw5WxD2cA//98ReyAAIe9gP//hMrwgAD/fAD///A+igAQ0UgA///XMME=
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 02:13:18 +0000
Message-ID: <EA9D1863-AF75-4171-9E20-9DCA1EDEB855@nominum.com>
References: <4EC46D52.8030909@ogud.com>, <DB9F0066-1B81-4CC6-BCE3-2DE103558220@network-heretics.com> <23E1BB1B-75C8-45E9-8CA3-2E3DC9B6DBC6@nominum.com>, <0B785F0F-F131-4C06-8B62-418B051EE79C@network-heretics.com> <B9CEF7F8-92E1-4D87-A548-BEEEA103EBC1@nominum.com>, <AF6E80F3-54DD-4DAF-B38B-47A5B18B469E@network-heretics.com> <17DF2079-601E-4F84-8F0A-20ECF9FF1366@nominum.com>, <358A8E60-5BFA-444A-B781-718BC5EF89A7@network-heretics.com>
In-Reply-To: <358A8E60-5BFA-444A-B781-718BC5EF89A7@network-heretics.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "mif@ietf.org" <mif@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mif] Server selection document is "band-aid" not solution
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <mif.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif>
List-Post: <mailto:mif@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 02:13:35 -0000

On Nov 18, 2011, at 4:39 AM, "Keith Moore" <moore@network-heretics.com> wrote:
> Seriously, dual-facing servers are the implementation artifacts.  It's an accident that they work at all.

Sorry, Keith, I'm having trouble parsing this.   If you have a point to make, it would help if it involved statements about things that work or don't work, and explanations as to why, not characterizations of the origins of various pieces of software and your opinion of their ontological status.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email