> On 08/20/2012 01:55, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
>> We will continue to reject this until there are more firm plans,
>> proper documentation on the security support side, which I cannot
>> remember Simon got an answer for.
> I gave a clear answer. If there are any pieces missing it's up to Simon
> to follow up with Dag-Erling.
>> I continue to say that I am not willing to trade one for another
>> for the sake of just changing the name.
> Have you seriously not been paying attention to the numerous reasons why
> BIND in the base is no longer a good fit?
Perhaps bunging together a quick wiki-page to point busier individuals
at would be handy?