Subject: [DNSOP] Brian Haberman's Yes on draft-ietf-dnsop-root-loopback-04: (with COMMENT)

From: "Brian Haberman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 05:15:31 -0700

Brian Haberman has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-root-loopback-04: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-root-loopback/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for writing a clear document that describes the approach and the
potential pitfalls.  As I noted earlier, I think this approach is
untenable given the fragility it will introduce.  Any chance we will see
a management item in the near future marking the resulting RFC Obsolete?

-- old comments below --

I can't decide if I should ballot Yes because this document does a good
job of describing how to deploy this approach or Abstain because the
fragility introduced in this approach appears to be untenable.

In the meantime, can someone explain why this document is stating a
requirement to deploy this approach with IPv4 only?