IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] draft-diao-aip-dns

Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com> Fri, 29 June 2012 15:18 UTC

Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5882621F86E5; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 08:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1340983132; bh=W1JqbKRooA/VDSGa0Y5GMnzByEpUIgUY0FKme5Meu9Q=; h=Mime-Version:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Message-Id:References:To:Cc: Subject:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help: List-Subscribe:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Sender; b=mMm1kCtVAniGnSAEQJkq89BvAyQXec9tqcRvwHxBGe+teawNGVXIO+aM/OcyQVYxk lwR6hPMaf3BmsQqYbnWbp8df+MF6FEYCJ3qiiCEpTT9068g8U0Gc0oNmWLPDbazFWm WDEv8OGMfuLiao3zvnyBtkQ4rsD9lYnzqVIkTnrE=
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C709421F86E5 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 08:18:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 5Uxw+qD-XNPc for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 08:18:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C76E421F86D1 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 08:18:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=961; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1340983128; x=1342192728; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=1Ln6IuYE2rxXBa9ZDrSJMPYNECyvaD25NYMNgqglhm0=; b=K/zbR8MtE2eLbHXBcTzXG0mQ3b8GWs2HcPehP2OLKug6Ydn3ufjLZ1V0 HmMPTG7d9v3dmcq4SJCkgCgnA99XlUU/120h1B/OFKYfcttJvljKpwAIx nFEJSDZEpqtkZdH/4NHcEGmS8AmAKS05sZhL4ez46OmdrKfWAApNo6/+9 Y=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,498,1336348800"; d="scan'208";a="94302381"
Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 29 Jun 2012 15:18:48 +0000
Received: from [161.44.65.173] ([161.44.65.173]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q5TFIlP2024967; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 15:18:48 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <F17B354A-7D6D-4532-AA9B-8AB5D35A4BF8@rfc1035.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 11:18:47 -0400
Message-Id: <21DEB429-D133-4C34-BFA8-F057E50977A8@cisco.com>
References: <1340433313.43178.YahooMailClassic@web161701.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <B726DEA1-2E57-4E67-B481-5788CB26869E@vpnc.org> <CAMm+Lwh1J8+LB44X0XmUm+Fob1bSrdJLY76Vr8qsUx0yeDat+A@mail.gmail.com> <F17B354A-7D6D-4532-AA9B-8AB5D35A4BF8@rfc1035.com>
To: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
Cc: DNSEXT Working Group <dnsext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] draft-diao-aip-dns
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org

On Jun 29, 2012, at 11:12 AM 6/29/12, Jim Reid wrote:

> On 29 Jun 2012, at 15:31, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> 
> ... lengthy religious and out of scope rant deleted ...
> 
> Please take your layer 9+ arguments elsewhere. They are not appropriate for this list or WG. Thanks.
> 
> Let's focus on the matter at hand. Is this draft technically sound? Does it have engineering merit? If so, it's due proper consideration. If not, it dies. It's that simple.
> 
> IMO, this draft is a remarkably bad idea and does not deserve any attention by the WG.

Agreed that it's a bad idea.  Can you be more specific - why is it not technically sound and lacking in engineering merit?

I ask to provide support for any decision not to pursue this work in the IETF.

- Ralph

> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dnsext mailing list
> dnsext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext

_______________________________________________
dnsext mailing list
dnsext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email