Re: [dane] Deployment focus? Re: IETF 85 - meet or not to meet?

[Dan York <[e-mail]>]

Paul,

On Oct 1, 2012, at 11:52 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:

> On Oct 1, 2012, at 8:07 AM, Dan York <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> Certainly ISOC *could* hold a meeting to discuss how to get DANE more widely deployed ... and the people that would need to be at that meeting would be, well, probably pretty much many of the people who would be at the DANE working group meeting at IETF! 
> 
> We fully disagree there. Protocol developers are often not protocol deployers. For example, I do not contribute to DNS server or DNS admin projects; the same would be true for the large majority of the people who contributed ideas and comments to the DANE protocol.
> 
> ISOC could pull together a meeting of such protocol deployers, as well as enterprises who might find DANE useful, and I suspect the overlap between people at that meeting and the last DANE WG meeting would be very small.

Sigh... I will have to confess that you are probably on target here, particularly as no one else has chimed in on this general thread in the last 24 hours. 

And thus we continue with the challenge that we in the IETF typically define something as "done" when "the protocol is defined" and not when "people can actually use the protocol".  

Here we have this truly awesome piece of work, DANE, and here it will linger in limbo until eventually maybe someday someone somewhere can implement it in some fashion that some people can use in some way.

Certainly I can - and will - do everything I can both personally and within ISOC's various means to get people talking about DANE and moving toward deployment.  Within the Deploy360 Programme, we've been talking to a good number of people about how to advance the advocacy and promotion of DNSSEC... and we have been planning to incorporate DANE into that effort.  But as much as we can do, we're still one organization - or even a group of organizations and companies.  We need many more people involved.

I know you may not think of yourself as a "protocol deployer", Paul, but I would argue that we do need everyone on this list thinking about how we can get DANE deployed.

DANE is far too awesome - and far too powerful - to let it linger in limbo.

My 2 cents,
Dan

-- 
Dan York  [e-mail]
http://www.danyork.me/   skype:danyork
Phone: [phone]
Twitter - http://twitter.com/danyork