Subject: RE: draft-dnsext-edns1-04.txt

From: "Loomis, Rip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 22:48:03 -0400

Paul Vixie had written:

> if i hear from anyone else i'll assume that EDNS1 is worth pursuing.
> otherwise it's dead and you should just repost the ADDR draft.  

Paul--
Please don't put EDNS1 in a sack and throw it off a bridge. 
From my read of the re-written EDNS1 I believe it's worth pursuing,
as I believe that it's A. better than the Eric's ADDR draft and
B. correct and nearly sufficient as it currently stands.

Actually, I think it's better already than some of the pre-existing
DNS-related RFCs, in terms of adequately specifying the details.  While
I understand that Eric would prefer to have many more things included,
I don't believe that such changes are immediately required...and EDNS1
would be better in several (small but useful) ways than what we have now.

(If) there's going to be a flag day soon that will require many
implementors to consider changes; now might be a sensible time to
try to get EDNS1 out there as well--IMHO anyway.

  --Rip

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>