From nobody Wed Dec 1 10:49:23 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 874813A0942 for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 10:49:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=UhwKo2MT; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=IThhAz2R Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QBG8RoKA5TzS for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 10:49:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx5.yitter.info (mx5.yitter.info [159.203.31.152]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F9463A092F for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 10:49:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx5.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id 103D3BD5C5 for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 18:49:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1638384555; bh=4e+rA62lv0d49vNhTmQxR8oZBn4c8kMjrYiMwbDSePk=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=UhwKo2MT5khKbDtzTHNra/PuzQ5Qgx7vx4ckhNai4tOLz558c63/XLDgrsFGmUv60 dMH1mKXGu2+efhfkdhaORmn+4oAd5M881UqkhF2etoZJCMsxqXiwLUpAM1diwGJrez q1eqHaxIEXZ7hv6xA52nqy0hYLoFamjczxZL+eGw= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca Received: from mx5.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx5.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ic_bJ-vkBWAa for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 18:49:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 13:49:09 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1638384553; bh=4e+rA62lv0d49vNhTmQxR8oZBn4c8kMjrYiMwbDSePk=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=IThhAz2R3kgkXS0ePivYKBBHnIPHIFdZElos2ASJ0rEgszqzeWngvzRAdzqEKOoyY sb+pLm1Po227Lb484+eduWHvyzHEJfZnXoC2bBGEO1SkfQrKEtSg3fF2WCO9BwBIDP ltP4k5Gbx8jHrwc0tQxdZJ/WjMwxzJ8zu1vDU2eY= From: Andrew Sullivan To: dnsop@ietf.org Message-ID: <20211201184909.32rsf3aopxpedh2j@crankycanuck.ca> Mail-Followup-To: dnsop@ietf.org References: <20211130183809.04E8230CA390@ary.qy> <3F49C6AE-D270-4EF5-996B-26B808753350@dukhovni.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F49C6AE-D270-4EF5-996B-26B808753350@dukhovni.org> Archived-At: Subject: Re: [DNSOP] How Slack didn't turn on DNSSEC X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2021 18:49:22 -0000 ObDisclaimer: work for Internet Society, speaking for me. On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 01:39:19AM -0500, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > >The main advice that comes to mind is to use a DNS hosting provider >with a proven (multi-year) record of doing DNSSEC reliably. Wouldn't that create a vicious circle in which the only way to start operating DNSSEC is already to have operated DNSSEC? Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com