Re: [dd] [Ext] starting charter text for the DELEG BOF discussion

A DELEG record shared over EPP or a functional equivalent should be capable
of expressing the information in an NS record, obviating the need to say
the same thing twice to your parent through a registrar.

On the wire, some might argue for on the fly synthesis. But concrete
instantiation simply shouldn't conflict.

G

On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, 4:24 pm Dave Lawrence, <tale@dd.org> wrote:

> Havard Eidnes writes:
> > > DELEG is a replacement mechanism for delegating the name space.
> >
> > That ("replacement mechanism") may be the intended goal, and might
> > have been feasible to acheive if it was invented in the early days
> > of the DNS.
>
> For what it's worth, I haven't heard any of the advocates of changing
> the delegation mechanism even hint at believing that it would
> completely supplant NS records.  I won't be so bold as to claim no one
> has never made that remark, but it is not the common belief.
>
> Yet the "replacement mechanism" language is still apt.  A resolver
> that follows DELEG instead of NS has, in all practical senses,
> replaced NS during that part of its process.
>
> > However, we are quite far from that situation, and I have not seen
> > any discussion about "deployment considerations" for DELEG in the
> > current environment.
>
> That you haven't seen it does not mean it has not been happening.  The
> conversation has been present among software developers, operators,
> registrars, and registries.  More of it can be happening on the list,
> yes, and will be happening in the working group, but rest assured that
> deployment considerations have not been ignored.
>
> > Or is the plan to exert pressure on folks who don't upgrade their
> > resolvers to versions supporting DELEG?  How?
>
> As with my earlier observation, in none of my discussions have I
> encountered anyone who has suggested that there be a plan to exert
> explicit pressure on any part of the ecosystem, be that to resolvers
> or authorities or registries or registries.
>
> > Or is that going to happen "automatically" because of the built-in
> > benefits of DELEG?
>
> Yes, that's my own view, that features that can be enabled through an
> improved delegation mechanism would lead market forces to gravitate to
> it.  (I wouldn't use "automatically" to describe it though.)
>
> --
> dd mailing list
> dd@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dd
>