IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] sands of time

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Tue, 30 August 2011 18:54 UTC

Return-Path: <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5235A21F8E11 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:54:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.437
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.137, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7B7X48B+8gyu for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:54:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppsw-41.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-41.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9690621F8D3F for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:54:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Received: from hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.54]:49723) by ppsw-41.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.156]:25) with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:fanf2) id 1QyTTM-0008B3-RL (Exim 4.72) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Tue, 30 Aug 2011 19:55:44 +0100
Received: from fanf2 (helo=localhost) by hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk) with local-esmtp id 1QyTTM-0007Bg-Ex (Exim 4.67) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Tue, 30 Aug 2011 19:55:44 +0100
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 19:55:44 +0100
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
X-X-Sender: fanf2@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk
To: Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <C6CF8296-D44E-432D-B78E-75A4BF477BA2@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1108301939590.30178@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <20110830161118.GA7666@vacation.karoshi.com.> <C6CF8296-D44E-432D-B78E-75A4BF477BA2@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LSU 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="1870870024-2117510792-1314730544=:30178"
Sender: Tony Finch <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
Cc: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com, dnsext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] sands of time
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 18:54:24 -0000

Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> Well, obviously it is as this proposal never dies. It was brought up a
> few years ago, and people said clearly "no". Now people ask for this
> again.

The proposal has been working its way through the ITU-R processes for over
ten years. There has been no clear consensus either way, so it keeps
getting passed up to the next highest committee meeting. The final
decision will be next year at the world radiocommunication congress, which
is the international treaty agreement meeting of the ITU-R. Being the most
senior decision making body it cannot punt :-)

This is utterly irrelevant to DNSSEC because whatever happens DNSSEC's
idea of time will be civil time, and DNSSEC's accuracy requirements are
very relaxed.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
Fair Isle: North or northwest 3 or 4, occasionally 5 at first. Moderate,
occasionally rough at first. Showers. Good.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email