On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 12:46:50PM -0500, Joe Abley wrote:
> >The draft has good recommendations regardless of the events that
> >gave rise to it.
>
> I agree. The sooner it is published, the better.
\begin{chair}
I'd like to remind everyone that this draft has passed IETF Last Call,
as a result of which several ADs put DISCUSSes into the ballot.
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/idtracker/draft-ietf-dnsop-reflectors-are-evil/>.
The main task of the WG w.r.t. this draft is now to consider the issues
raised and support the editors in addressing and resolving the concerns
voiced in LC. The editors have submitted -05 as an attempt to cover the
discussing ADs' concerns and we are - together with our AD - continuing work
to get the DISCUSSes cleared.
<http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dnsop/draft-ietf-dnsop-reflectors-are-evil/draft-ietf-dnsop-reflectors-are-evil-05-from-04.diff.html>
Input from the WG received on list and in Vancouver was helpful in making
progress here. Please let's keep the discussion focussed on the remaining
open items.
\end{chair}
-Peter
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
