Paul, On Jul 8, 2014, at 7:18 AM, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@vpnc.org> wrote: > None of the above relates to Joe's big issue, which is that implementing the > draft doesn't help anyone much. To me, that's a much more valid (and > measurable) criticism than anything on the list above.
I believe section 5.1 discusses the benefits in a reasonable way, although perhaps more could be explained about the reduced latency aspects. Perhaps unsurprisingly, I might add a bit on responsiveness, i.e., having incentive to improve infrastructure or respond to problems based on the fact that direct/paying customers will scream at you if you don't. However, I suspect whether or not you believe those benefits provide sufficient help depends largely on your belief about the existing infrastructure and how that infrastructure will scale in the future. Fortunately, the draft is not demanding the existing infrastructure be dismantled so people with differing opinions can choose to implement what they believe is best. Regards, -drc
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
