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
