IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: The problem I see with DNSSEC as a potential end user and administrator.

Duane at e164 dot org <duane@e164.org> Fri, 08 August 2008 10:53 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A7F3A6841; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 03:53:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.464
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.464 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.031, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XVlsSpQcLM3Z; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 03:53:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 761393A6407; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 03:53:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>) id 1KRPWT-000NCL-G1 for namedroppers-data@psg.com; Fri, 08 Aug 2008 10:48:41 +0000
Received: from [208.82.100.153] (helo=mail.aus-biz.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <duane@e164.org>) id 1KRPWP-000NBK-TB for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Aug 2008 10:48:39 +0000
Received: from [192.168.100.244] (dsl-48-19.qld1.net.au [125.168.48.19]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.aus-biz.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B377AFF26C; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 20:48:36 +1000 (EST)
Message-ID: <489C2480.2020801@e164.org>
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 20:48:32 +1000
From: Duane at e164 dot org <duane@e164.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080724)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stefan Schmidt <zaphodb@zaphods.net>
CC: Namedroppers <namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: The problem I see with DNSSEC as a potential end user and administrator.
References: <489BE047.1010100@e164.org> <e90946380808080203g65c99a72meca9db15c1194df1@mail.gmail.com> <489C0E08.3040406@e164.org> <e90946380808080218n7acddd46gd99d39fa71edcb26@mail.gmail.com> <489C112A.8000306@e164.org> <e90946380808080232w756e1123u2237fa1ac846173f@mail.gmail.com> <489C140C.60205@e164.org> <e90946380808080252r35e88807v15e904d10c73cb76@mail.gmail.com> <20080808102132.GO18233@zaphods.net>
In-Reply-To: <20080808102132.GO18233@zaphods.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <namedroppers.ops.ietf.org>

Stefan Schmidt wrote:

> think. Saturation is important to the success of a protocol, think of blueray
> vs. hd-dvd so you need not only to address the forbes500 but also

Actually funny you should mention blueray, an article about it today how
it may have won the format wars but no one really cares about it because
DVDs are good enough.

Many think DNS is more or less good enough and well you get the idea.

-- 

Best regards,
 Duane

--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email