On 12 August 2017 at 23:42, Paul Vixie <p...@redbarn.org> wrote: > > > failing that level of commitment, the IETF ought to kill DNSSEC altogether. > > this is very similar to the "shall we had IPv6's features to IPv4, since > V6 is > taking so long to deploy, and these features are badly needed?" debate. > > +1.
If any operator would like to implement SWILD without DNSSEC or NAT44 without IPv6, It's OK. It maybe a good solution in their network for their custormer. I do know many people and solutions walk around DNSSEC, IPv6 (due to IPsec) and TLS for surveillance issues. But IETF as a worldwide standard body has its position on the technical path towards a better Internet. Davey
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
