FYI, I have submitted an alternate draft as an individual submission. It was submitted after the meeting cutoff and so will not be processed until Monday, March 19 at 9:00 AM ET, when Internet-Draft posting resumes.
The draft can be found in the meantime at http://www.av8.net/IETF-watch/Drafts/draft-anderson-reverse-dns-status-00.txt If you compare the two drafts, and find them generally consistent, then you have either not understood or not read closely the Sullivan/Senie draft. Particular attention should be paid to Sections 3.1, 3.3, and 4 of the Anderson draft and corresponding sections of the Sullivan/Senie draft. As previously indicated, I do not believe that draft-ietf-dnsop-reverse-mapping-considerations-02.txt should move forward because it continues to have very serious problems, as previously discussed on the DNSOP list. I strongly object to the Sullivan/Senie draft, enough to write an alternative. The set of problems with that draft are not new, but have been repeated in various forms, often just by trivial word changes, since the original in-addr-required draft was submitted 7 years ago. I think the only way forward is to abandon the Sullivan/Senie draft in favor of an alternative that is more clearly written. Thanks, Dean Anderson Av8 Internet, Inc -- Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service? www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service 617 344 9000 _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
