Ondřej Surý wrote on 2020-09-10 21:25:
Paul,
do you actually believe that shouting the same thing over and over
will achieve anything?
no, of course not.
We’ve heard you before, we’ve listened to you, we’ve considered your
arguments, and you haven’t convinced us and there’s a consensus
between the vendors to go ahead with the change because it’s
beneficial for the DNS ecosystem.
i think you changed the definition of the words "we" and "us" midsentence.
Sending multiple shouts to mailing lists, issue tracker, etc...
because you have different opinion is not helpful to the DNS community
nor to the cause. We are as much DNS experts as you are.
i don't think all of the people i intend to address here have heard my
views. they may think that dns-oarc speaks for the community rather than
for a small self selected team. they may also think that i as co-founder
of dns-oarc can be relied upon to support this activity. so, thank you
for your concern for my reputation (or my sanity, if that's also true),
but i'll continue. if you wish to actually respond to any of my claims,
i am listening. if you wish to continue to ignore those claims, i will cope.
this isn't a flag day and shouldn't be called that. it cheapens the term.
1232 is a cargo-cult number. we must not revere as holy those things
which fall out of the sky.
there is a right way to deprecate fragmentation. it would not involve
adding config complexity.
there is a right way to reach consensus. it's an RFC draft, not a github
repo for the initiated.
in the testing referenced by the "flagday2020" web page, there was no
significant difference in loss between 1200 and 1400. there will be a
significant difference in truncation and tcp retry.
--
Sent from Postbox
<https://www.postbox-inc.com/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=siglink&utm_campaign=reach>
_______________________________________________
dns-operations mailing list
dns-operations@lists.dns-oarc.net
https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations
