Subject: Re: Trust Anchor Key management issue, stalled or slow progress?

From: "Olaf M. Kolkman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:57:48 +0100

Thierry,

Thanks for the kind reminder of what we have set out to do.

Rest assured that I am applying gentle pressure off-list. Not enough  
to provide you with an ETA on the requirements draft. So for now I'd  
say that the developments for the requirements are between stalled  
and slow progress.

For the NSEC3 work I spoke to Geoff this morning and I am expecting a  
list of open issues any time soon.

As for:
> According to the above view, those participants who are
> interested in DNSSEC deployment as a genuine improvement in
> Internet security should consider active participation.

There are times I wished I had less subtle means for driving  
motivation. Any of the well known motivation means such as pay- 
checks, sex, threats of violence, outlook on eternal fame are not  
available or seem to fail.

--Olaf

-----------------------------------------------------------
Olaf M. Kolkman
NLnet Labs
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

---

From: Paul Vixie <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 17:38:57 +0000

# There are times I wished I had less subtle means for driving motivation. Any
# of the well known motivation means such as pay- checks, sex, threats of
# violence, outlook on eternal fame are not available or seem to fail.

ok, let's try alchohol.  if there's a requirements draft submitted before
the next ietf deadline, then the actual authors of same can count on me for
all the drinks/beer they can swallow at the ietf hotel bar for the whole week.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>