On Thu, Feb 09, 2012 at 01:17:52PM -0800, Joe Abley wrote: > Hi Bill, > > On 2012-02-06, at 14:12, <bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com> > <bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com> wrote: > > > Thanks to Warren, Ed, John D., David C. and Kato-san for their > > comments/corrections. > > Any more? > > I see you added some text based on our conversation in sunny Christchurch, > thanks for that. As promised, here's a summary of that conversation for the > list(s). > [elided] > > In summary, I think the document should be substantially reorganised. This > makes it difficult to provide a meaningful line-by-line critique. However, I > am very happy to put my money where my mouth is and copy-edit/reorganise > along the lines I'm thinking if that seems like a useful way to explain > myself. I don't think the -04 draft, even with copy-editing, is useful to > publish as-is. > > > Joe
I had a similar conversation with Terry (check the thread archives). Effectively what you propose is a "clean slate" instead of building off existing work and actual practice. I think that is a fabulou idea but it has a couple of caveats: ) it will take considerable time to reach consensus within the operator community, let alone the large community. ) it will not reflect actual practice but an ideal to be achieved. I think that starting work on such a draft is a great idea -BUT- in the mean time do not let "perfect" get in the way of "good enough". I beleive Terry agreed with that line of thnking. Of the existing Operators, A, B, E, G, H, J, L, and M have made positive comments and worked on upgrading this base text provided by one of the Operators. Is your opinion / argument strong enough to stop work on this draft? That said, I'd love to see a revamped version, if youhave the time to copy-edit/reorgnize the document. /bill _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop