On Sep 29, 2016, at 8:37 PM, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net<mailto:war...@kumari.net>> wrote:
On Thursday, September 29, 2016, Ted Lemon <mel...@fugue.com<mailto:mel...@fugue.com>> wrote: So, if anyone is still wondering why we need a /good/ problem statement, this discussion is why. You are both taking past reach other because you are looking at only the part of the problem you care about. ... and why we need a Special Use Names problem statement, and not just a RFC6761 problem statement. This problem is bigger than just 6761... We will have to agree to disagree. RFC6761 is the document that created this issue. Focusing on what is wrong running its process should be, IMHO, the first step. It is like: first, admit we have a problem. Alain, speaking solely on my own behalf.
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
