On 25/06/15 14:36, Phil Regnauld wrote: Hey Phil,
> I totally understand, I live in Nairobi myself :) Ah :) > Hm, as I can see, resolution works - I think it's probably better > to have a functioning KE delegation, than a broken signed one. Yes, this is quite true. > I strongly disagree on this point. I understand the frustration, but > to be honest, it's KE's prerogative to decide when and if they want > to reitroduce a DS record. I've been to KENIC and they do good work > over there, but I think it would be a disservice to the Kenyan > community to hurry under pressure, submit a DS when they're not > quite ready to do so, and experience another failure. That would > certainly kill trust more than anything. I agree completely. Introducing a DS record and breaking things again would be bad. I can completely understand KeNIC's caution. My main gripe is that they've not been telling is what is going on. Saying "we'll let you know" and then not saying anything for ages, and ignoring my messages, is what I'm really griping about. Okay, so the report presented at ICANN 53 is a start, and I have complete sympathy for the poor admins at KeNIC. We've had our own share of DNSSEC failures, and I know what a nightmare it is. Regards, Anand
