On Nov 27, 2017, 11:47 AM -0800, Richard Barnes <r...@ipv.sx>, wrote:
> I don't think that it make sense to infer from the failure of RFC 8145 that > resolver/authoritative telemetry isn't possible Huh? RFC 8145 wasn’t a failure — it was stunningly successful. Within a few months of publication it provided us insights we hadn’t before had into how the infrastructure was actually working. This was unexpected. > To the degree that the DNS still works at all, there must be some channel by > which information can be faithfully passed from authoritative to resolver, > which can presumably be used to bootstrap telemetry. Maybe it's a TXT record > with an HTTP URL; maybe it's a funny CNAME. Maybe it is, and when we see another viable channel, we’ll undoubtedly make use of it. Until then, adding something like sentinel would seem to be a useful way of gathering information about the state of reality. > Maybe you can't build a road through the jungle, but there are still rivers > that make it through, which can carry a message in a bottle. I don’t want to let the perfect be the enemy of the … well, perhaps not good, but functional. Regards, -drc
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
