To:
Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc:
Alain Durand <Alain.Durand@Sun.COM>, dns op wg <dnsop@cafax.se>
From:
David Conrad <david.conrad@nominum.com>
Date:
Wed, 30 Apr 2003 15:40:31 -0700
In-Reply-To:
<E19Azcr-000AYk-4S@roam.psg.com>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: example.com
From a technical perspective, it would make sense to use the documentation set-asides as specified. However, as I indicated, I agree with Ed in that there appear to be plenty of other things that cause constipation within the IESG without adding requirements for ultimately futile attempts at protecting people from themselves to the list. However, this is decidedly non-technical. On Wednesday, April 30, 2003, at 03:00 PM, Randy Bush wrote: >> In a related category, but not DNSop specific, the IESG should enforce >> the usage of documentation prefixes, such as the one recently reserved >> by APNIC for IPv6. There is little value to enforcing one without the >> other... > > i don't think this is the place for general id nits discussion. too > much > noise and most interested parties not here. > > i asked dnsop specifically to learn of any technical ops issues. and i > really meant the question. are there technical ops issues? > > randy > > #---------------------------------------------------------------------- > # To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>. > #---------------------------------------------------------------------- # To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.