On Mon, 8 Sep 2008, Ron Bonica wrote:
Do you deny that the vulnerabilities described in this document *could*
be exploited? If this is your claim, and you can substantiate it, the WG
will entertain your objection.
I'm asserting that whatever vulnerabilities that do exist can be
mitigated in
Folks,
Someone on DNSOPS points out that I am calendar challenged. September 5
has already past. I meant to say Friday, September 12.
Ron
Ron Bonica wrote:
Dean,
On the surface, I deem your objection to be without merit. Unless you
can convince me
Dean Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 8 Sep 2008, Ron Bonica wrote:
Do you deny that the vulnerabilities described in this document *could*
be exploited? If this is your claim, and you can substantiate it, the WG
will entertain your objection.
I'm asserting that whatever vulnerabilities that do
Bill,
That why in the next paragraph I said:
If you think that you have an alternative plan for mitigating this
attack, you might be able to resurrect open resolvers with a new draft
that describes this mitigation.
Also, if Dean feels that the alternative mitigation is so compelling
that he
On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Ron Bonica wrote:
Your assertion that false statements, contrived attacks, discredited
sources, and lack of evidence of harm, are somehow not legitimate
reasons to dispute a document is also without basis, and indeed is
refuted by IESG actions in TLS-AUTHZ.
I stand
[cc's cleaned up]
Hi,
At his point, I will sit quietly for a while and let the WG comment
on whether they think that your proposed
alternative mitigation is adequate. On Friday, the WG chairs will
gauge consensus and I will take appropriate action.
Given the stunningly successful
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Conrad
writes:
[cc's cleaned up]
Hi,
At his point, I will sit quietly for a while and let the WG comment
on whether they think that your proposed
alternative mitigation is adequate. On Friday, the WG chairs will
gauge consensus and I will
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Mark Andrews wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Conrad
writes:
At his point, I will sit quietly for a while and let the WG comment
on whether they think that your proposed
alternative mitigation is adequate. On Friday, the WG chairs will
gauge consensus and I
William F. Maton Sotomayor wrote:
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Mark Andrews wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Conrad
writes:
At his point, I will sit quietly for a while and let the WG comment
on whether they think that your proposed
alternative mitigation is adequate. On Friday,
