On Thu, 15 Feb 2024, Ralf Weber wrote:
There is a difference between what a lot of people on this thread did to keep the Internet alive
Resolvers would have disabled dnssec to remain alive. Also not at all something nice to happen, but the Internet in fact would not have died. I am super happy this got prevented and kudos to everyone who got together to do this. I assume at this point, the public DNS resolvers upgraded, but most other software/services is still in the pipeline, and the internet is still with us. The IETF isn't the protocol police. It does not do "flag days" although the DNS community has certainly run a few events like that (all of which I opposed other than the EDNS0 workaround issue). While there is a good use case for flag days for cutting of a long tail of RFC violating legacy, eg like cutting EDNS0 workarounds after 20 years, there has not yet been an RFC stating that keytags are not allowed to be duplicate. As such, a flag day is not appropriate. If you publish an RFC, then wait 20 years, then a flag day could be appropriate. Of course, that's just the view of the IETF that does not do flag days. The IETF instead nudges people to do the right thing using BCPs (eg DNSSEC algorithm guidance of RFC8624, maximum NSEC3 iterations in RFC9276), bis document updates, moving RFCs to Historic status, and moving RFCs from Experimental to Standard track. Other communities could surely decide to violate the RFCs and get together and issue a flag day event in the near future. It would be the wrong thing to do. Paul _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
