It is an interesting draft and I can see why the problem concerns you. The dummy DS is a clever work-around, but it is a pity about the validation bug in Google public DNS.
I wonder about the possibility of adjusting the rules for caching delegations. Would it make sense to remember that a referral is insecure for the lifetime of the NS RRset, instead of the lifetime of the negative DS answer? Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ > On 5 Mar 2014, at 10:23, fujiw...@jprs.co.jp wrote: > > Dear Chairs and WG participants, > > I updated draft-fujiwara-dnsop-ds-query-increase this Janurary. > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fujiwara-dnsop-ds-query-increase > > Recent DS traffic increase seems not high, I did not request time slot > of WG meeting. However, Increasing is a fact. > > Recent DS query graph is here: > http://member.wide.ad.jp/~fujiwara/files/DS_graph_20140305.pdf > > Please comment to the draft. > > What should I do about this draft from now on? > > Regards, > > -- > Kazunori Fujiwara, JPRS <fujiw...@jprs.co.jp> > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
