i do not foresee a time when any dns protocol agent won't need NS
support any more, nor also UDP/53 support. so DELEG can at best add
features for its adopters at the expense of permanent added complexity
for the specification and for the system.
i realize that in today's client/server model ~everything is either a
mobile device or a cloud, and that the deployment curve might not be as
flat nor its tail as long as (for example) EDNS.
fujiwara's point that not everybody liked parent-side delegation when it
was last debated deserves more thoughtful consideration than i've seen.
this text on page 1 of the draft is not evidence-backed:
This limitation is a barrier for efficient introduction of new DNS
technology. New features come with additional overhead as they are
constrained by the intersection of resolver and nameserver
functionality. New functionality could be discovered insecurely by
trial and error, or negotiated after first connection, which is
costly and unsafe.
the idea that DELEG will be extensible and will evolve over time does
not foster confidence. i guess we should consider the camel. see also:
http://www.redbarn.org/files_redbarn/DNS-Experiment-2001.pdf
tim april's
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
