Date: 20 Nov 2002 08:49:16 -0000 Message-ID: <20021120084916.34961.qmail@cr.yp.to> Automatic-Legal-Notices: See http://cr.yp.to/mailcopyright.html. From: "D. J. Bernstein" To: namedroppers@ops.ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, dns@list.cr.yp.to Subject: Re: axfr-clarify on the move again References: <96C102324EF9D411A49500306E06C8D1020200B6@eketsv02.cubis.de> <5.1.1.6.2.20021119143305.02dd6838@mail.amaranth.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Daniel Senie writes: > Working group sessions are places to accelerate discussion and try to > reach consensus on ideas which should then be brought back to the > mailing list to ensure the wider audience has the opportunity to > participate. [RFC 2418, Section 3.2] Are you suggesting that the broader WG, in mailing-list discussions, overturned the consensus achieved at the meeting? When, pray tell, did that happen? Here's the timeline: * July: Consensus against axfr-clarify---``too BIND-specific.'' * August: One message from Randy Bush. * November: The DNSEXT chairs declare consensus for axfr-clarify. As far as I can see, that's it. There were no other public discussions. The DNSEXT chairs' declaration of consensus was fraudulent. ---D. J. Bernstein, Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics, Statistics, and Computer Science, University of Illinois at Chicago P.S. Randy Bush has been discarding my messages to namedroppers again. See http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/namedroppers.html for previous incidents. It's outrageous that standardization activities are being carried out on a censored mailing list.