Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2007 11:50:39 -0500 From: Stephen Montgomery-Smith <stephen@math.missouri.edu> To: Jo Rhett <jrhett@svcolo.com> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> Subject: Re: named.conf restored to hint zone for the root by default Message-ID: <46B4AE5F.7020706@math.missouri.edu> In-Reply-To: <81177D1D-AEDB-4DB6-88F2-E4BA46CEFB9B@svcolo.com> References: <46B1AC75.9060907@FreeBSD.org> <BB1C4DD5-F6D9-48D4-AAC9-D54B1A44578A@svcolo.com> <alpine.BSF.0.999.0708031722111.38804@ync.qbhto.arg> <2FB74E09-4C74-4653-A2EE-B88F9F1C08C6@svcolo.com> <46B3D27F.10603@yahoo.com> <81177D1D-AEDB-4DB6-88F2-E4BA46CEFB9B@svcolo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jo Rhett wrote: > On Aug 3, 2007, at 6:12 PM, John Merryweather Cooper wrote: >> I would appreciate it if the personal attacks ceased. > > There was no personal attack there. I never called him names or made > any remark about his lifestyle or anything else. I did say that he > isn't paying attention to the people who disagree with him, but that is > an observable fact. > >> As an observer >> with no ax to grind on this issue, it is apparent that slaving the root >> zone is technically possible, but not necessarily good policy. > > Actually, it has been argued/shown-by-those-who-would-know that while > you can do it, it won't work in a stable manner once everyone starts > doing it. The protocol itself is not designed for many unknown > associations, really. > >> It would >> be nice if those arguing against slaving the root zone would articulate >> the specific effects on top-tier servers and quantify them. > > This has been done, both here and on the DNS Operations list where this > is actually topical. Repeatedly. This topic is dead, horse beaten to > crap, except that Doug Barton really loves this idea and won't listen to > why it won't work, and why it shouldn't be done, and why he shouldn't > have done it that way. He just keeps coming back and saying "now lets > talk about this some more..." As another person with no ax to grind, my sense is that this was a professional albeit heated discussion. Briefly, it seems to me that Doug introduced changes with no prior discussion - this was his only real fault, and for this he has appropriately apologized. The result of the heated discussion was that the slave zone thingy was turned into an option rather than the default. As far as I am concerned, this is an entirely satisfactory resolution, and shows that the discussions had their desired effect. That the discussions became a little heated merely shows that we are human beings. The main thing is that everyone was upfront and honest about their agendas, and that the matter was resolved in the appropriate technical manner. Best regards, Stephen
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46B4AE5F.7020706>