Declan Ma wrote: > Zhiwei, > > Your proposal seems reasonable. But we can not separate the > recursive-level and authorative-level, as you call it by the way, since the > DNS is an integrated one. If both of the two solutions are feasible, we need > to figure out how and to what extent, both solutions could collaborate on > root zone file distribution, not in the “respective scenarios” . > > > Declan Ma > ZDNS
in my opinion, the applicability statement of a recursive solution would be: "if you want these benefits and can manage these risks, then you can configure your rdns as follows". whereas the applicability statement for an authoritative solution would be: "if you want to serve root dns content to a loopback, lan, campus, or global network, then configure your adns and your routing as follows." separate from applicability, there is vision. the vision statement for an rdns solution would be: "to allow self selected recursive dns operators to become less dependent on the root name server system, the following proposal is offered." whereas the vision statement for the adns solution would be: "to better server root dns content to the internet, the following proposal is offered." vixie _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
