I would suggest there is also a third angle here: On Jul 8, 2014, at 11:30 PM, "yzw_iplab" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi, all, There are currently two solutions proposed to distrbute the DNS root service more widely.In my opinion, we should work on this issue following the two steps: 1) we should discuss their feasibility from technological aspects. the technological requirements of them should be gathered and listed ,and then analyzed one by one. 2) these two solutions consider the similar issue from different levels: one is the recursive-level and another one is the authorative-level. (if both of them are feasible) we should figure out respective scenarios and requirements suitable for each of them. 3) we should discuss how easily the solutions can actually be *deployed* and used. I realize this is perhaps a subset of #1, but I want to call it out specifically because this step seems to be sometimes overlooked. If, for instance, a solution requires changes to the way stub resolvers work and requires updates to the zillions of devices out there that now provide embedded DNS resolvers, the chances of that solution being *widely* deployed are significantly less than a solution that requires changes at only, say, authoritative name servers. Not to say the first solution *couldn't* be deployed, but we just need to be realistic up front about what it might take to get the solution out there. My 2 cents, Dan (who spends his days looking at how to get DNSSEC more widely deployed) -- Dan York Senior Content Strategist, Internet Society [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> +1-802-735-1624 Jabber: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Skype: danyork http://twitter.com/danyork http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
