On Jan 22, 2018, at 12:43 PM, Bob Harold <rharo...@umich.edu> wrote: > Do we need to make sure stub resolvers get updated before we update DNS, to > avoid breaking things?
I support it too. One observation, Bob—my recollection is that when we discussed this previously, we concluded that it's probably better, if a resolver is broken, for it to fail than succeed. IOW, at the time I didn't hear a lot of voices saying "we have to hold off on deploying this." This is not to say that it's a bad question. Do you have any thoughts about what the answer should be? In particular, use cases where breaking the resolver would be worse than not breaking it? Given the way the discussion went earlier, that would probably be the thing to bring up, if you can think of a case where this is something we ought to be working hard to avoid.
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
