It appears that Andrew Sullivan  <[email protected]> said:
> In the absence
>of an automatic local trust-anchor installation mechanism that happens at 
>network auto configuration (the very idea of which
>strikes me as creating way more problems than it is likely to fix), I don't 
>see how DNSSEC is compatible with this degenerate use
>of a global namespace with an overloaded private use space.

I agree with your point that trying to make DNSSEC work in a private namespace 
is a losing battle.  But since we clearly
have people who think it should work, maybe they could try something along the 
lines of what I suggested yesterday, a
TOFU way to publish local trust anchors on the theory that whatever network is 
the first one a device connects to is
the one it trusts.

I have my doubts about whether it would make things better, but I'd rather give 
it a try than rerun the arguments about
which flavor of DNSSEC breakage is the right one.

R's,
John

_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to