On 2/26/20 11:28 PM, Andrew M. Hettinger wrote: > "DNSOP" <dnsop-boun...@ietf.org> wrote on 02/26/2020 08:34:55: > >> From: "Vladimír Čunát" <vladimir.cunat+i...@nic..cz> >> To: "dnsop@ietf.org WG" <dnsop@ietf.org> >> Cc: "Andrew M. Hettinger" <ahettin...@prominic.net> >> Date: 02/26/2020 08:35 >> Subject: Re: [External] [DNSOP] status of the aname and svcb/httpsvc > drafts >> Sent by: "DNSOP" <dnsop-boun...@ietf.org> >> >> On 2/25/20 8:07 PM, Andrew M. Hettinger wrote: >> > Frankly, you've got it exactly the wrong way around: even with httpsvc >> > speced out completely, it will take time for it to be deployed to >> > browsers. That's assuming you can get enough buying from (mostly) >> > google to even make it happen at all. >> >> I don't think it's so simple. The current ANAME draft specifies new >> behavior for resolvers, and there I'd expect even slower overall >> upgrades/deployment than in browsers. Also I'm unsure how big a part of >> authoritative implementations will want to do ANAME expansion. (It >> seems unlikely for "our" Knot DNS, for example.) >> > > Is there actually a commitment from browser makers to implement it?
ANAME and its proprietary friends try to solve the issue it within the DNS, so there is no need for commitment from browser makers. - Matthijs _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
