On Sep 3, 2008, at 3:19 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>
> +1
>
> The benefit of an open process is its ability to obtain unexpected
> input that is
> useful.
>
> The detriment is that it places an additional burden on everyone to
> filter out
> the noise.
>
> Failure to do that adds more noise.
I a
Paul Vixie wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Danny McPherson) writes:
>
>> Dean, I'm not going to argue this point by point with you, ...
>
> how long is this community going to let a single person dominate its agenda?
+1
The benefit of an open process is its ability to obtain unexpected input tha
> "the un-answered argument wins"
only if it's never answered. that would cross the line.
answering it every day for the rest of all of our lives crosses the other line.
(not responding publically to the personal parts of what bill said to me.)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Danny McPherson) writes:
> Dean, I'm not going to argue this point by point with you, ...
how long is this community going to let a single person dominate its agenda?
i'm using kill-by-thread on dnsop now. i have no idea how much i'm missing
of what's being posted, but what i
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Domain Name System Operations Working Group of
the IETF.
Title : Requirements for Management of Name Servers for the
DNS
Author(s) : W. Hardaker
On Sep 3, 2008, at 9:42 AM, Dean Anderson wrote:
>
> I choose to report on why this data is not credible and should not be
> accepted by the DNSOP WG.
I believe the WG has heard your position:
"There has been no further discussion of these attacks since the
two very small motivating attacks were
On Wed, 3 Sep 2008, Danny McPherson wrote:
> Dean, I'm not going to argue this point by point with you, I simply
> provided data points on what folks who do this as part of their day
> job have observed and reported. You can choose to accept this, or
> not.
I choose to report on why this data is
Dean,
I'm not going to argue this point by point with you, I simply
provided data points on what folks who do this as part of their
day job have observed and reported. You can choose to
accept this, or not.
As for bots and C&Cs and what's done in practice today
and what's not, well, I know a lit
On Sep 3, 2008, at 8:13 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 11:33:54AM +1000,
> Mark Andrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> a message of 24 lines which said:
>
>> A NXDOMAIN response if cyptographically proved with DNSSEC.
> 2) You are playing with words.
>
> "The domain
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 11:33:54AM +1000,
Mark Andrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
a message of 24 lines which said:
> A NXDOMAIN response if cyptographically proved with DNSSEC.
There are two possibilities:
1) I understand nothing to DNSSEC (this is quite possible, giving my
experience w
10 matches
Mail list logo
