To:
ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com, namedroppers@ops.ietf.org, ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com, dnsop@cafax.se
From:
Nathan Jones <nathanj@optimo.com.au>
Date:
Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:02:29 +1000
In-Reply-To:
<Pine.BSF.4.21.0108091959470.7371-100000@internaut.com>; from Bernard Aboba on Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 08:14:18PM -0700
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: (ngtrans) Joint DNSEXT & NGTRANS summary
A6 supporters have spent a lot of time promoting flexibility, arguing that we shouldn't limit our options because of fear of what might happen. AAAA supporters have spent a lot of time telling us that such flexibility is not required and that possible A6 implementation problems can't be fixed just by making recommendations for DNS administrators. The debate has gone on and on, but no consensus has been reached. (I don't consider hums at London's meeting to be consensus.) Is there merit in asking the Area Directors (or possibly the IESG) for arbitration? -- nathanj Matt Crawford wrote: >Here's the problem. There was no attempt at consenus *building* after >the discussion, only a quick measurement of opinions at that point. Bernard Aboba wrote: >Rather than worrying so much about what this or that company might do, the >IETF might better spend its time and energy making clear decisions within >a reasonable timeframe. > >In many cases "no decision" is actually the worst possible decision.