Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> wrote: > On Tue, 17 Nov 2020, Tony Finch wrote: > > > Any serious attempt at improving delegations needs to deal convincingly > > with the quesion of why support for CDS, CDNSKEY, and CSYNC is so > > appallingly bad. > > Because IETF does not enforce sunsets of old stuff. The market has no > strong reason to move to support this new stuff, as there is a first > mover disadvantage with too many players. Look at Cloudflare, who is > very willing to do all these new things, and they are stuck with old > software/people at (sub)Registrars and Registries. > > This is also why DNSSEC is not ubiquitous.
Yes, but I don't mean answer the question of what the difficulties are (we know the answers, I hope), I mean "deal with", counteract or avoid the difficulties. Any new work needs to be deployable: the IETF is supposed to be about running code, after all. If a proposal is heading in a direction that we know from past experience is not likely to be successful, then it needs a really solid argument why this time will be different. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ Sole, Lundy, Fastnet: West or northwest 6 to gale 8, occasionally severe gale 9 in Lundy and Fastnet, decreasing 3 to 5 later. Rough or very rough, occasionally moderate later. Showers. Moderate or good. _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list dns-privacy@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
