On 22 Jun 2016, at 11:13, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzme...@nic.fr> wrote: > It is not "fun", it is the only way to have broken implementations > (Akamai, djbdns) fixed. If we do not name them, they will continue forever.
Even ignoring the loaded "shaming" terminology that Jim added to this thread, I still have to disagree a bit. It is not the only way, and certainly there is brokenness that gets fixed without publicly pointing fingers. For example, in the case of the conceptual failure of the Akamai nameserver to properly identify empty non-terminals in all necessary answer-seeking paths, this was a problem that I noted internally a decade ago. Yet it was triaged well below other work because it had no practical operational impact at the time and fixing it was non-trivial. Only when the qname minimisation draft came around did it really become an operational issue, and the priority of the change request was immediately raised. No one needed to point out to us either that we had the problem or that operational evolution made it matter. Working on fixing it was going to happen regardless. As to why it has taken so long, the public deployment of a fix was delayed when we discovered that some customers actually relied on the non-compliant behaviour. Believe me, I was frustrated by this probably more than anyone else. All that said, I don't really object to Akamai's nameserver having been publicly named as a problem for qname minimisation. Identifying potential problems is obviously a crucial part of protocol development. Just remember, though, on n'attrape pas les mouches avec du vinaigre. We are all colleagues here, working to the same end -- a better Internet. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
