Re: [DNA] [Issue X] LinkID v.s. Landmark Prefix

[JinHyeock Choi <jinchoe@gmail.com>]

Dear Tero

> I have been dead silence for quite a long time now. I haven't been able
> to follow the WG progress and I feel somewhat lost. I spent a couple of
> days last week trying to catch up with the work ... ~200 unread mails
> and new drafts. Oh, dear...

I contributed some for that. Sorry. I ask your kind understanding. :-)

> > How do you think of FRD? We got a pretty nice result. :-)
> 
> I see it has potential. At a glance one concern which emerged to me was
> possible security issues. Unfortunately I'm not much of a security
> expert, and have some difficulties further analyzing the proposal from
> that perspective.

ok. 

> > Maybe that's the way I'd better follow and FRD would better to be
> > content with informational RFC as a kind of auxiliary solution.
> 
> I'm sort of newbie when it comes to the IETF but I would assume that
> some IETF people would have allergic reactions (much like I have with
> politics) on solutions that have operator "connections" (couldn't find
> any better English word right now). Taking that into account, I would
> guess that the road of an informational RFC would be a bit less bumpy.

ok. 
 
Nowadays I barely keep myself afloat dealing with the volume of mailing 
list. (Am I already drowning?) To me, trying to process mailings feels like 
trying to swallow water directly out of high-pressure fire hose. :-) 

See you soon in Paris, La Ville Luminaire, and let's have some fun together. 

Best Regards

JinHyeock