Re: SRV records considered dubious

[Keith Moore <moore at cs.utk.edu>]

> 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.


it depends on whether my intuition and/or experience see a potential 
problem there, and also whether I have a sense that the proponents of 
that new idea are willing to acknowledge that potential.  and often it 
seems like major design decisions are cast in stone before the problem 
is understood - and I object to that also.  (NEA being the latest 
example that comes to mind)

of course different people have different ideas about what constitutes 
substantive grounds for an argument.  I remember one DKIM proponent 
loudly telling me that since we couldn't predict the future my concerns 
about how DKIM would affect the reliability of mail were unfounded, all 
the while apparently oblivious to that the same argument could be used 
to say that his suspicions that DKIM would be useful were equally 
unfounded...

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.

Keith

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfoused to determine that a service is not
supported (rather than not being accessible right now).

   john




_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf