On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 23, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Andrew Sullivan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 07:25:46AM -0700, Paul Hoffman wrote: > >> Speaking as someone who supports all end systems to be their own > validating recursive resolver. > > > > "Validating" I get. Why recursive? > > That's a fair question. I'm much more interested in validating than > recursive. I don't believe that enough upstream resolvers will reliably get > the end system answers that can be validated, so the validating end system > will have to be able to be a recursive some of the time anyway. I suppose > it would be better to have the end system be a "validating > stub-but-recursor-when-necessary", but that seems weird. Maybe it isn't. > I would like to push you back to 'validating records that matter to the application layer like DANE and security policy records.'
_______________________________________________ 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
