Sure. We could also ask the IAB--there's a ton of expertise on the IAB. :)
However, in fact it's an accident of slow deployment of DNSSEC validators that this has worked for thirty years, which would suggest that that experience isn't going to help that much. That said, I really was just being a devil's advocate. It's fine with me that DNSOP is being asked to review it. I just thought it was a bit ironic. On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Andrew Sullivan <a...@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 01:19:28PM +0900, Ted Lemon wrote: >> The reason I ask is that the document proposes /not/ to use DNS to resolve >> it, which I think is correct. So it really doesn't sound like a dnsop >> issue. It's sounds like an intarea issue, or else keep it in sunset4. > > Perhaps changing a 30-ish year old DNS convention that has running > code basically on every computer in the known universe is something > that people with DNS operations experience might have some insight > about. (Which is not to say they're wrong.) > > A > > -- > Andrew Sullivan > a...@anvilwalrusden.com > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
