> From: Keith Moore [mailto:moore@xxxxxxxxxx] > > I have noticed that whenever someone does propose to do > just that you > > come out and argue against it on vague, unsubstantiated grounds and > > when asked to clarify promise to provide a more detailed > refutation at > > a later date. > of course it takes time to write up details. there is also a > tendency of people who have vague and/or poorly-thought-out > proposals to demand that other people invest more work > determining the nature of the problems with their proposals, > than they have themselves invested in analyzing either the > problem they purport to be trying to solve or the potential > pitfalls of their proposed solution. I might be incompetent but I am pretty sure that my proposals are not vague. On the contrary I break the proposals down to a level of detail that even I find tediously pedantic. Accountability is not a vague concept: Accountability = Authentication + Accreditation + Consequences I have made very detailed technical proposals. I have shown that it is entirely possible to support wildcarded prefixed DNS records without changing the legacy infrastructure and without changing the wildcard definition in DNSSEC. I have made exceptionally specific technical proposals yet you still don't seem to feel that these rise to the level that warrants your technical consideration (as opposed to the time taken to reply here). _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf