Subject: RE: draft-klensin-nomcom-term-00.txt

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 07:07:03 -0700

> From: Eliot Lear [mailto:[email-masked]] 

> Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> > No matter how good an incumbent they are much less likely to ask 
> > questions of the form 'why has this WG existed for over a decade?', 
> > 'why isn't it finished?', 'why is nobody using it?'
> 
> If an AD isn't asking those questions it's probably because 
> it's not taking any of his/her time.  And if it's not taking 
> their time I really don't care if it exists or not.

What if you were planning to use the output of the Working Group?

The Internet faces two rather serious problems. The Internet is not
secure and we are running out of address space faster than IPv6
deployment is proceeding.

We really could use a version of DNSSEC that can be deployed.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:57:30 +0200

> What if you were planning to use the output of the Working Group?

Sorry, I thought you were aiming toward the age old "this working group
has existed too long" debate.  On the usefulness question, I actually
think an experienced AD is going to know what works and what doesn't,
more so than an inexperienced one.  But the AD doesn't invent the ideas.
 So...

> deployment is proceeding.

"Imminent Death of the Net Predicted"®

Wake me when it happens.  Economics will have its say here, IMHO.

> We really could use a version of DNSSEC that can be deployed.

Ummm... Physician, Heal Thyself?

Eliot