On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 08:53:06AM -0500, Matt Larson <m...@kahlerlarson.org> wrote a message of 32 lines which said:
> I'll note that from a technical/mechanical perspective, ICANN's and > Verisign's root zone management systems already know how to deal > with delegations. A DNAME in the root would require an unknown level > of development by both parties. I've never read the source code of the root zone management system, but it seems surprising that it could be a non-trivial level of development. I assume this system is complicated because it is highly sensitive, and because it needs to incorporate a lot of defenses against both mistakes and attacks, but they should be more or less the same for DNAME and NS/A/AAAA, no? > Adding new types of information to the root is certainly possible: > I'm not trying to discourage that. But for planning and > expectation-setting purposes, the community needs to take into > account the long lead time that will be required for anything that > requires technical modifications to the root zone management system. Wild guess (and I pay beers if I'm wrong): the technical work will take much less time than the process one. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
