On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 01:11:17PM +0100, Jeroen Massar via dns-wg wrote: > > Same. I support this, and I also support lowering NS even further, even > > to 3600. > > Another Aye from me on DS & NS to TTL 3600.
I'm slightly reminded of the solar activity cycle by another instance of a race to low TTLs, to be followed by another train of thought recommending high (infrastructure RRSet) TTLs in favour of resilience. No objection to Anand's proposal at all, but maybe there are limits to committees finding "optimum" numbers, especially under the impression of a prominent incident. -Peter -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/dns-wg
