On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 06:59:16PM +0000, Dan York wrote:
> In a hackathon like this, a small team of people agrees to work on
> (ideally!) a clearly-defined project that can, in theory, be completed in
> two days and is something that the judges and others might find interesting
> and useful. There can be several different teams under this topic working
> on different projects. Sunday afternoon at 3pm the teams are supposed to
> stop and come up with a presentation. Those are given at 4pm and awards
> are given at 5pm.
I am concerned that this sends the message that a trustworthy DANE
implementation is something one can quickly slap together in a very
short time. This is not true, and the vast majority of implementations
that make this assumption are deeply flawed.
So while I'm all for DANE adoption, I am rather ambivalent about
hackathons at this stage of the game if the output is intended to
implement a trustworthy verifier.
If the project just builds ancilliary tools (for managing zones
and the like) then I am less concerned.
I would very much like to not see yet another non-working DANE
validator on Github, ...
--
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
