> On 8 Feb 2018, at 5:02 pm, Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> wrote: > > On Wed, 7 Feb 2018, Robert Story wrote: > >> On Wed 2018-02-07 10:43:16-0500 Paul wrote: >>> How about using this query to also encode an >>> uptime-processstartedtime value? Maybe with accurancy reduced to >>> minutes. I think that would return valuable data. >> >> -1 for feature creep and the technical reasons Joe mentioned. > > We have a giant hole in our understanding of why there are updated > nameservers running the latest software with the older keys. We > need to gain understanding and we know we need more data. > > Getting more data is the core mission, not feature creep. If there is > a technical better way to do this, it's worth considering. >
The sentinel mechanism is proposed to be capable of posing a question to a user’s “DNS Resolution cloud” - it is not intended capable of posing a question to an individual DNS resolver. What I am trying to say is that here is a big difference between a question of: "will this user be impacted at the point of the roLl of the KSK” and “what are the trust keys for this resolver?”, or “What is the process uptime of the DNS process on this resolver?” My intuition is that the mechanisms to implement a measurement framework for these questions would necessarily be very different. Geoff _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
