On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:07:40 -0400 Jared Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 11:04:59AM -0500, Jorge Amodio wrote: > > > > > > So, you say that(sarcasm). I just got off a 45 minute > > > call where the US > > > Federal government is interested in how to effectively > > > communicate to the infrastructure operators the importance and > > > risks of not upgrading the resolvers. > > > > > > Just tell them to call the head of DoC and explain why is so > > important and imperative to come up with an acceptable/reasonable > > signing authority and enable the deployment of DNSSEC. The patch is > > just a workaround, it does not fix the underlying problem that has > > been there for very long time. > > I raised that issue earlier in the week with some parts of > the US Feds already. > > Personally, I see this event as major driver for deploying > dnssec. > I've been talking to US Gov't folks, too. They really want DNSSEC (and secure BGP...) deployed. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb