Re: [mif] Last Call for MIF DNS server selection document

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Wed, 14 September 2011 05:49 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.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 AC80A21F8C74 for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 22:49:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.98
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.98 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619]
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 8bVHWQqPYQQO for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 22:49:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF13621F8C66 for <mif@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 22:49:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shinkuro.com (unknown [89.211.51.194]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7B7AE1ECB41C for <mif@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Sep 2011 05:51:37 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 01:51:35 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: mif@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20110914054256.GC78623@shinkuro.com>
References: <COL118-W599D9E8760C3E370077FC3B1140@phx.gbl> <4E683F9B.7020905@gmail.com> <37CF81A7-B249-40EB-B8E6-A706680C4174@gmail.com> <COL118-W46242B408E47FC6AB7954B1040@phx.gbl> <4BD05B04-DB10-47A7-855F-6AAB8EF7646D@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4BD05B04-DB10-47A7-855F-6AAB8EF7646D@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: Re: [mif] Last Call for MIF DNS server selection document
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: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 05:49:33 -0000

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:05:39PM -0400, Margaret Wasserman wrote:
> 
> Maybe we should talk to the DNSEXT and DNSOP chairs before sending the LC to their mailing lists, to see what they think?
> 

I did in fact send a note to the dnsext list asking people to come
over here and review or comment.  AFAIK, this had no effect, but I
could be wrong.  

If you want us to run a formal LC on the document in dnsext, I'm
certainly willing to do it.  Note that we have a policy that we need
at least five positive reviews (this is a necessary but not sufficient
condition) for WG consensus in favour to be declared, and we have had
serious problems in DNSEXT in getting sufficient review even for
documents we have actually adopted as WG items.  So be careful what
you ask for.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com