Joint DNSEXT & NGTRANS summary

[Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>]

I have overheard nearly opposite outcomes quoted by random people 
in the halls, and some of the joint co-chairs (all the ones I've 
asked so far) seem reluctant to say anything substantive in public
about the outcome of the joint dnsext/ngtrans meeting.  I know there
are some interested parties who were not present and I have no idea
whether or how well they heard it on the mbone.  So, here's my
view from the floor ... other views would be welcome, the sooner
the better.

There was a lot of discussion, culminating with a "hum" on the
following four choices:

1. Deploy A6 in full panoply, synthesize AAAA for transition period
2. Deploy A6 conservatively ("A6 0"), synthesize as above
3. Reclassify A6 as experimental, use AAAA for production
4. Reclasify A6 as historic, use AAAA for production.

The relative volumes of the hum seemed to be 3 > 2 > 1 > 4, by all
accounts.  There was quite obviously no consensus (i.e., unanimity)
or rough consensus (in the usual IETF sense of near-unanimity).  It
could not even be concluded that the loudest hum represented a
majority of those voicing an opinion.

The difference in impressions taken away, therefore, I would account
for by differences in opinion about whether the preference of a
plurality, possibly a slim majority, represent a decision to alter the
status quo.  (That being A6 on the standards track.)