[dns-wg] Re: revised text for NTIA response - v4
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: revised text for NTIA response - v4
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] NTIA response - v5
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Wed Nov 5 23:11:03 CET 2008
On Nov 5, 2008, at 16:37, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 11:11:33AM +0000, > Jim Reid <jim at rfc1035.com> wrote > a message of 44 lines which said: > >> Please contribute text. > > OK. I suggest to replace: > > "RIPE welcomes the NTIA's consultation on the proposals to sign the > root and is pleased to support that effort. We urge the NTIA to adopt > a solution that leads to a prompt signed root zone. The solution must > not compromise the stability and integrity of the root zone management > process." > > by: > > "RIPE wants the root zone to be signed, in order to enable an easier > deployment of DNSSEC." > > and then go on with your text. Stephane, this your text is somewhat abrupt. I do not consider it appropriate for any formal correspondance, far less something that represents the DNS WG and/or the RIPE community. Our response should be courteous and observe the expected niceties: like thanking NTIA for running a consultation and giving the world a chance to comment. Which the NTIA didn't *have* to do. I will try to construct something from your input that (a) is something the WG/RIPE community can accept as a consensus view; (b) observes the usual etiquette which both parties should follow.
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] Re: revised text for NTIA response - v4
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] NTIA response - v5
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]