Re: [DNSOP] [rssac] [I-D Action: draft-rssac-dnsop-rfc2870bis-04.txt]
On Feb 11, 2012, at 9:25 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote: On Feb 9, 2012, at 1:39 PM, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: I think that starting work on such a draft is a great idea -BUT- in the mean time do not let perfect get in the way of good enough. Just to be clear: a good handful of people, me included, have said that the wording in the current doc is not good enough, or only good enough if you squint hard. It is clearly much worse than the document that this is supposed to replace. To be honest, I'm unclear as to the point of the document. Could someone clarify? What exactly is revising 2870 supposed to do? Thanks, -drc ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
Re: [DNSOP] [rssac] [I-D Action: draft-rssac-dnsop-rfc2870bis-04.txt]
On 2/11/2012 5:25 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote: On Feb 9, 2012, at 1:39 PM, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: I think that starting work on such a draft is a great idea -BUT- in the mean time do not let perfect get in the way of good enough. Just to be clear: a good handful of people, me included, have said that the wording in the current doc is not good enough, or only good enough if you squint hard. It is clearly much worse than the document that this is supposed to replace. wearing my rfc 2010 co-author hat: +1. paul ___ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
