Subject: A least a draft now exists for trust anchor key rollover requirements.

From: Thierry Moreau <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 17:17:26 -0500

Dear all:

A least a draft now exists for trust anchor key rollover requirements.

See http://www.connotech.com/draft-moreau-dnsext-tak-req-00.txt

(submitted today as an individual submission draft)

Perhaps it is not an ideal situation that a requirements document is 
authored by the promoter of an alternative in the solution space.

In this perspective, you are kindly invited to bring forward a better 
set of TAK requirement statements, and/or suggestions to improve the 
above one.

Best regards,

-- 

- Thierry Moreau

CONNOTECH Experts-conseils inc.
9130 Place de Montgolfier
Montreal, Qc
Canada   H2M 2A1

Tel.: (514)385-5691
Fax:  (514)385-5900

web site: http://www.connotech.com
e-mail: [email-masked]

--
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: "Olaf M. Kolkman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 06:15:24 +0100

>
> Perhaps it is not an ideal situation that a requirements document  
> is authored by the promoter of an alternative in the solution space.
>
> In this perspective, you are kindly invited to bring forward a  
> better set of TAK requirement statements, and/or suggestions to  
> improve the above one.

Dear Thierry,

Thanks for your contribution but I would prefer if we could leave  
this document shelved just a little while.

We have assigned editors to produce a requirement document for the  
working group and I am still confident that they will deliver, albeit  
the delay. At this moment we as a working group should not raise the  
amount of entropy by having multiple requirement documents floating  
around. On the other hand I see that you, and others (myself  
included) are anxious to see output.

I propose that we wait for the assigned editors to produce. If the  
editors fail to produce before the cutt-off we will have to use your  
document as the basis for further discussion. I am not saying that  
your contribution is out of scope for this group, by no means. But  
I'd prefer if we could focus on just one document, that of the  
volunteer editors.

I share frustration about the speed of this process and except for  
the Vixie Beer Fund there are very few ways we can force/motivate  
people to do work. On the other hand I do think a good set of  
requirements is important so that we can then continue with selection  
of the appropriate technology. Those technologies all seem pretty  
advanced.

--Olaf

-----------------------------------------------------------
Olaf M. Kolkman
NLnet Labs
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/