On 2013-08-23, at 15:14, Vernon Schryver <[email protected]> wrote: > I can't believe you're seriously suggesting that words in any IETF > document telling people to use narrow NTAs would have any effect > on resolver operators.
Personally, my hope is that such words would provide guidance to software vendors, to constrain resolver operators with sensible mechanisms that solve specific problems narrowly. Experience shared by Comcast and Google suggests that NTAs are necessary for validation on a large scale. However, Comcast and Google are engaged and have the resources to do the right thing; small resolver operators are generally not engaged and have fewer resources available to deal with support-loading (churn-enhancing, profit-harming) problems whose origins are elsewhere. They are far more likely to be guided by (a) the hooks available in their software and (b) the kind of rumour mill that came up with "block ICMP for security reasons". Reasoned guidance from the IETF at best would improve (a) and decrease the incidence of (b). At worst, it would do no harm. Joe _______________________________________________ dns-operations mailing list [email protected] https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-operations dns-jobs mailing list https://lists.dns-oarc.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-jobs
