On Aug 30, 2012, at 9:45 AM, Paul Vixie <p...@redbarn.org> wrote: > On 2012-08-30 9:40 AM, Johan Ihrén wrote: >> Not to question the abilities of the WG, but I still have to ask whether (in >> your opinion) the operations community would be better off with a single >> document that may be finished around Christmas Eve 2020 or rather live with >> multiple docs that are published somewhat sooner than that. > > while i agree with these sentiments i have a broader concern. ietf's > mantra is good engineering. if we know now that keytiming has flaws, and > we are only considering publishing it because we know our own record > shows that reaching consensus for keytiming-bis will take a long time, > then it's an implicit indictment (by us) of our own record and habits. > > we should have a better reason for publishing two documents, like new > ideas occurred to us after the first one was beyond reach of our pen, or > they have different topics.
A big +1. An operator who wants to know how to do rollovers will not know *or care* why they followed IETF guidance that was overturned or even clarified soon after. The reasons that the base document got delayed so horribly do not matter any more: what matters is what the WG and its leadership are willing to do today to help operators in the near future. --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
