On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Lorenzo Colitti
<lorenzo(_at_)google(_dot_)com> wrote:
<snip>
It seems to me that approximately 30% of the non-biolerplate text in this
draft discusses DNS whitelisting. (And in fact, in its original form the
draft entirely on DNS whitelisting - hence the filename. The rest was added
later.)
Whitelisting is a practice relevant to a few large websites (since nobody
else is using it). It so happens that the websites that employ this practice
are going to stop using it, all together. Given the cost and implications,
I'd say practice is unlikely to be resurrected.
So, you decide to tell the whole story, and talk about whitelisting *and*
World IPv6 Launch. Or you can decide that whitelisting will soon be
irrelevant, and not talk about either whitelisting or World IPv6 Launch. But
you can't talk about whitelisting without talking about World IPv6 Launch,
because if you do, your document is missing the key piece "how do you remove
the whitelist", and that's a disservice to its readers.
To be more specific, at least section 5.5 ("it is unclear how implementers
will judge when the network conditions will have changed sufficiently to
justify turning off DNS Resolver Whitelisting and/or what the process and
timing will be for discontinuing this practice") is now incorrect. It *is*
clear, and it's what those implementers are doing as part of World IPv6
Launch.
Does that make more sense?
Or, the way I read you, you tell us that this entire document isn't
relevant anymore.
It cover something called whitelisting that were in use for a short
periode of time for reason no one in a few year can understand as
relevant?
--
Roger Jorgensen |
rogerj(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com | - IPv6 is The Key!
http://www.jorgensen.no ; | roger(_at_)jorgensen(_dot_)no
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf