Subject: RE: Summary: DNSEXT WGLC: To OPT-IN or not to OPT_IN

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 06:03:43 -0700

Your actual statement was in response to Rob who stated he did not
think Opt-in was a good idea but would not object for the sake of
consensus.

This is exactly also my position.  I strongly feel that the problems
that OptIn may or may not solve or impose are dwarfed by the problems
we still have to face to get DNSSEC widely deployed. Most of the
work sofar has been done from the viewpoint of the DNS-administrator,
we still have to do a lot of work to make DNSSEC understood, working,
and useful for the user.

I do not believe that I misrepresented your statement during the last
call period.

Given the procedural manipulations and abuses by one of the chairs I
think folk will understand why this has to be played strictly by the 
originally stated rules at this point.

The last call was the FOURTH, each time the last call failed to go
the way Randy wanted a new last call was staged. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 4:29 AM
> To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Summary: DNSEXT WGLC: To OPT-IN or not to OPT_IN
> 
> 
> [Quoting "Hallam-Baker, Phillip", on Apr 27, 16:44, in 
> "Summary: DNSEXT WGLC ..."]
> 
> > Folk may want to check I recorded their statement correctly. ...
> 
> Please count my position as "I oppose OPT-IN".
> 
> -- ted (NLnet Labs)
> 
> --
> 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/>
> 

--
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/>

---

From: Brian Wellington <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 09:22:42 -0700 (PDT)

> the way Randy wanted a new last call was staged. 

Rather than making unfounded accusations, maybe you should consider the
fact that during the first 3 calls, as well as this one, there was nothing
resembling working group consensus in either direction.

Brian