This is the third time I'm sat down to write this. So this time I'm
going to go ahead and be annoying. (While writing this I got a spam
message with the subject line "stop fighting." Spam isn't always
wrong.)

Nothing is distracting from anything else. This WG has no budget cap
on what it can look at. We are all volunteers and give time in
accordance to our interests, whether our interests are personally set
or set by those funding our participation. The WG as a whole can
afford to try NSEC3, DNSSECbis, DNSSECter, SO, Ohta's proposal, etc.
in as much as there is no definition what what it means to be a
member of the WG. The WG can also afford to have dissenting opinions
expressed.

It comes down to whether a proposal can meet with the collective
positive opinion of the group, enough to warrant it being promoted in
someway. Until then, let statements fly, let challenges be thrown.
Not every insulting remark has to be refuted.

Skepticism over an idea is natural. There are two reasons.

One, for each hard problem we see today in DNS, there will not be a
simply obvious solution. Proof by contradiction says - if there were
a simply obvious solution, someone here would have already thought of
it, most likely. So, no one ought to believe that they've found an
"instant miracle" and folks hearing new ideas ought not to be
prepared to defend against the "latest onslaught to sanity."

Two, consensus building is inherently conservative. Any new idea
ought to be expected to meet opposition. This isn't because the
listeners are stodgy and unwilling to change, if there is a problem,
it is because the proposal was not made clear enough.

Keep in mind too that many of us in the group have many years of
experience and education - and that applies not just to those who you
know, it applies across the group. In general we all have the same
or similar mind set and have learned the same fundamental principles
of engineering and math. Where we differ is usually in understanding
the problem to be solved, and in our other experience and learnings
(like economics, legal, etc.). Please keep this in mind when looking
at preparing a critical remark and when receiving a critical remark.
The criticism may be the fault of the problem goal and not the
approach chosen.

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

Dessert - aka Service Pack 1 for lunch.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: